THE  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE 


AND  ENGLISH  GRAMMAR 


R  AM  S  EY 


ibrarv 

,iv:-:rsityof 

california 

;ANOt€GO 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/englishlanguageeOOramsiala 


THE 

ENGLISH    LANGUAGE 


AND 


ENGLISH   GRAMMAR 


AN   HISTORICAL  STUDY 

OF    THE 

SOURCES,  DEVELOPMENT,  AND  ANALOGIES  OF  THE   LANGUAGE 

AND    OF    THE 

PRINCIPLES  GOVERNING  ITS  USAGES 


ILLUSTRATED    BY    COPIOUS    EXAMPLES    FROM   WRITERS 
OF  ALL  PERIODS 


SAMUEL    RAMSEY 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

NEW   YORK  LONDON 

37   WEST  TWENTY-THIRD   STREET  24   BEDFORD   STREET,    STRJ^ND 

S^^t  ^nithnbotktr  ^kss 
1892 


Copyright,  1893 

BY 

SAMUEL  RAMSEY 


Electrotyped,  Printed,  and  Bound  by 

Ube  ftnickecboctier  press,  mew  ^ottt 
G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 


PREFACE. 

Much  of  what  is  contained  in  the  following  pages  was 
first  written  for  purposes  of  private  instruction,  and  without 
any  view  to  publication  ;  but  as  one  chapter  was  added  after 
another,  it  began  to  be  thought  that  some  portions  might 
interest  a  larger  class  of  readers.  There  are  many  persons 
who  would  be  glad  to  know  more  about  the  English 
language  than  can  be  gained  from  the  formal  routine  of  the 
public  schools,  who,  nevertheless,  are  unable  to  procure  and 
read  the  great  number  of  valuable  works  on  the  subject  that 
have  issued  from  the  press  within  a  period  of  fifty  years. 
Such  persons  are  in  a  position  to  appreciate  a  work  taking 
a  somewhat  wider  view  than  the  common  text-books,  and 
presenting  some  of  the  more  familiar  results  of  modern 
philology. 

There  are  two  classes  for  whom  this  book  is  not  intended. 
The  first  are  those  who  are  already  familiar  with  all  the 
results  of  past  labors,  and  who,  therefore,  can  find  nothing 
here  to  add  to  their  present  ample  stores  of  knowledge,  there 
being  no  claim  to  original  discovery  or  invention.  The 
second  class  are  those  who  neither  know  or  care  anything 
about  the  history  or  philology  of  their  native  tongue. 
Between  these  extremes  is  the  large  and  important  class  who 
already  know  something  and  desire  to  know  more. 

There  was  a  fable  of  the  Rabbins  that  the  first  pair  of 
blacksmith's  tongs  were  made  during  the  six  days  of  cre- 
ation, because,  without  such  primordial  instrumentality,  no 
tool  could  ever  have  been  fashioned.  I  cannot  but  think  that 
many  have  unconsciously  imbibed  a  somewhat  similar  belief 
in  regard  to  English  grammar.  It  may  not  be  distinctly 
taught,  but  everything  tends  to  impress  the  learner  with  a 


iv  Preface, 

vague  idea  that  the  rules  laid  down  in  his  manual  were 
ordained  "  in  the  beginning,"  and  have  remained  unchanged 
and  unchangeable  ever  since,  and  that  in  the  fulness  of  time 
the  English  language  was  made  in  obedience  to  them.  The 
reader  of  these  pages  will  have  an  opportunity  to  become 
acquainted  with  the  opposite  doctrine  that  language,  so  far 
as  we  are  acquainted  with  it,  is  a  human  product,  subject  like 
others  to  evolution  and  mutation — as  liable  to  change  as  the 
forms  of  our  garments  or  our  dwellings, — and  that  the  office  of 
grammar  is  not  to  go  before  and  decree  what  men  shall  say, 
but  to  follow  after  and  describe  what  they  do  say. 

S.  R. 


ERRATA. 

Page  19,  line  ^z^  for  acres,  read  races. 
"        "       "      "   /or  Higdon,  read  Trevisa. 
"        21     "     iS, /or  ne  s]>e,  read  nes 'pe. 
"        6;^     "       6, /(?/' extradition,  r^d!^  extrajudicial. 
"        65     "     ;^^,  /or  puine,  read  puine. 
"        71     "       4,  /or  ae-za,  read  at-ia. 
"        73     "     41, /or /am,  read/cer. 
"        76     "     2g, /or /t'e,  like,  read /ing. 

"  134     "     24,  /or  /uss,  read  Fuss, 

"  181     "     22, /or  i's,  read I's. 

"  239     "     32,  Note,  There  was  also  a  pural,  cildra,  or  cildru. 

"  242     '*     29  ii,/or  fit,  gis,  tiS,  read  iet,  ges,  teS. 

"  2g^,/or  the  initial  pa,  r^d;</everywhere  pa. 

"  294,  line  22, /or  preceded,  r^^^did  not  precede. 

"  324     "     20, /or  ipsi,  read  ipse. 

"  347     "     2\,/orlx  se,  readlxse. 
"        "       "     22, /(3r  Venir  ^^,  r^<2i/ Venirj(?. 

"  359     "       3,  _/<?/■  graf en,  r^did^  grave. 

"  364     "     2S, /or  sow,  read  saw. 

"  375     "     "^^t/or  wollede  and  shullede,  read  wolde  and  sceolde. 

*'  412     "     2(),/or  levdeyr,  read  levyr. 

"  428     "     2g,  read  1  did  not  hear  \i. 

"  436     "     2^^,  22,,/or  ecrire,  read icrire. 

"  440     "       4, /"(^r  thries,  r^d!</ thrice. 

"  445     "     1 9, /<?r  f and-e,  r^<7^  f und-e. 
"        "       "     2i,y<?/- fanth-um,  r^a:^funth-ura. 

/or  fand,  r^a^  fund-on. 
"        "       "     22,  yi7r  fanth-uth,  r^rt:^funth-uth. 

/^r  fund-e,  r^a^  fund-on. 
"        "       "     23, /^/- fanth-un,  r^«^funth-un. 

/or  fand,  read  fund-on. 

"  463     "     \(), /or  lie,  read  like. 

"  467     "       9, /(9r  gesoth,  r^a^  geseoth. 

"  480     "     22, /or  live,  read  lice. 

"  504     "       i,/!?^  ^dluans,  r<?a^-^duans. 


CONTENTS. 


PART  FIRST. 


The  English  Language. 


Chapter        I. — The  Instability  of  Language 

Chapter  II. — The  Sources  of  English     . 

Chapter  III. — The  Province  of  Grammar 

Chapter  IV. — Word-Making 

Chapter  V. — The  Alphabet 

Chapter  VI. — Grimm's  Law 

Chapter  VII. — Pronunciation  and  Spelling 


3 

12 

43 

53 

94 

132 

138 


PART  SECOND. 


English  Grammar. 


Chapter        I. — Preliminary 217 

Chapter       II. — Nouns 225 

Chapter     III. — Adjectives 288 

Chapter  IV. — Pronouns       .........  307 

Chapter  V. — Verb  and  theirs  Several  Kinds         ....  343 

Chapter     VI. — Auxiliary  Verbs 372 

Chapter    VII. — The  Conjugation  of  Verbs 415 

Chapter  VIII. — Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions        .         .  476 

Chapter      IX. — Syntax 506 

Chapter  X. — Suggestions  to  Young  Writers          ....  552 

Index 569 


PART  FIRST. 


THE  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE. 


THE  ENGLISH    LANGUAGE. 


CHAPTER   I. 

THE  INSTABILITY  OF  LANGUAGE. 

A  LANGUAGE  in  common  use  is  subject  to  continual  change. 
Old  words  sink  into  disuse,  or  become  altered  in  sound  or 
signification  ;  and  new  ones  are  constructed  or  introduced. 
Two  principal  causes  accelerate  this  transformation — the 
commingling  of  diverse  races,  and  a  change  of  habits,  ideas, 
and  pursuits.  The  vocabulary  of  a  simple  pastoral  people 
would  entirely  fail  to  meet  the  wants  of  modern  civilization, 
with  its  attendant  arts  and  sciences,  while  the  loss  of  any 
art  or  body  of  ideas  would  be  followed  by  the  disuse  of  its 
peculiar  terms.  Several  causes  also  contribute  to  retard 
change,  among  which  are  freedom  from  foreign  influence ; 
political,  religious,  or  literary  bonds  of  union  among  the 
inhabitants  of  a  considerable  area  ;  and  a  continuance  of  the 
same  mode  of  life.  The  sanctuaries  of  Jerusalem  and  Mecca, 
and  the  Olympic  games  at  Elis  brought  together  people  of 
kindred  blood  and  faith  ;  and  such  great  works  as  the  He- 
brew Bible,  the  poems  of  Homer,  the  Koran,  and  the  author- 
ized German  and  English  versions  of  the  Bible  have  had  a 
most  powerful  conservative  influence  on  their  respective 
languages.  Dr.  Schliemann  found  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey 
still  understood  and  appreciated  by  the  villagers  of  Greece 
two  thousand  five  hundred  years  after  the  text  was  settled 
by  Pisistratus. 

3 


4  The  English  Language. 

Change  seems  to  be  spontaneous  and  inevitable,  beyond 
all  requirements  of  utility,  as  evidenced  by  the  great  variety 
of  pronunciations  found  in  dictionaries  and  in  common  use, 
and  the  frequent  introduction  of  new  words  when  the  old 
ones  are  equally  good.  The  change,  in  small,  undeveloped 
communities,  is  sometimes  surprisingly  rapid.  Waldeck, 
who  labored  as  a  missionary  in  Central  America,  completed 
a  dictionary  of  one  of  the  native  languages  in  1823.  Re- 
turning to  the  same  tribe  after  an  absence  of  ten  years,  he 
found  his  dictionary  already  antiquated  and  useless.  How 
this  is  brought  about  is  very  graphically  shown  by  Robert 
Moffat,  a  missionary  in  Southern  Africa.     He  says : 

"  The  purity  and  harmony  of  language  are  kept  up  by  their 
pitches  and  public  meetings,  by  their  festivals  and  ceremonies, 
as  well  as  by  their  songs  and  their  constant  intercourse.  With 
the  isolated  villages  of  the  desert  it  is  far  otherwise  ;  they  have 
no  such  meetings  ;  they  are  compelled  to  travel,  often  to  a  great 
distance  from  their  homes  and  native  villages.  On  such  occasions 
fathers  and  mothers,  and  all  who  can  bear  a  burden,  often  set  out 
for  weeks  at  a  time,  and  leave  their  children  to  the  care  of  two  or 
three  infirm  old  people.  The  infant  progeny,  some  of  whom  are 
beginning  to  lisp,  while  others  can  just  master  a  whole  sentence, 
and  those  still  further  advanced,  romping  and  playing  together, 
the  children  of  nature,  through  the  live-long  day,  become  habitu- 
ated to  a  language  of  their  own.  The  more  voluble  condescend  to 
the  less  precocious  ;  and  thus  from  this  infant  Babel  proceeds  a 
dialect  of  a  host  of  mongrel  words  and  phrases,  joined  together 
without  rule,  and  in  the  course  of  one  generation  the  entire  character 
of  the  language  is  changed"  * 

In  some  such  way  were  produced  the  countless  languages 
and  dialects  of  the  native  American  tribes.  Even  in  Europe, 
where  some  kind  of  national  literature  is  rarely  wanting,  the 
same  tendency  to  separation  has  been  at  work  with  a  force 
proportioned  to  the  prevailing  ignorance  and  disorganization. 
The  early  Celtic  population  of  the  British  Islands  became  in 
time  separated  into  five  mutually  unintelligible   branches ; 

*  MUUer's  "  Lectures  on  Language,"  vol.  i. 


The  Instability  of  Language.  5 

the  Basques  in  the  adjoining  provinces  of  France  and  Spain, 
numbering  little  more  than  half  a  million,  have  their  mother 
tongue  split  into  seven  dialects ;  and  in  Friesland  the  travel- 
ler encounters  a  different  form  of  speech  in  every  village. 

The  gradual  transformation  of  the  English  tongue  may  be 
illustrated  by  a  series  of  selections  reaching  back  to  a  time 
when  the  language  becomes  wholly  unintelligible.  The 
words  which  would  not  be  used  now,  at  least  in  the  same 
sense,  are  distinguished  by  italics. 

DAVID    HUME,    I  76 1. 

"  He  promised  that  the  present  grandeur  of  Harold's  family, 
which  supported  itself  with  difficulty  under  the  jealousy  and 
hatred  of  Edward,  should  receive  new  increase  from  a  successor 
who  would  be  so  greatly  beholden  to  him  for  his  advancement." 

JOHN  LOCKE,  1687. 

"  If  we  will  disbelieve  everything  because  we  cannot  certainly 
know  all  things  ;  we  shall  do  muchwhat  as  wisely  as  he  who  would 
not  use  his  legs,  but  sit  still  and  perish  because  he  had  no  wings 
to  fly." 

SIR   PHILIP    SIDNEY,    1580. 

"  There  were  hills  which  garnished  their  proud  heights  with 
stately  trees  ;  humble  valleys  whose  base  estate  seemed  comforted 
with  the  refreshing  of  silver  rivers  ;  meadows  enamelled  with  all 
sorts  of  eye-pleasing  flowers  ;  thickets,  which  being  lined  with  the 
most  pleasing  shade,  were  witnessed  so  to  by  the  cheerful  dispo- 
sition of  many  well-tuned  birds  ;  each  pasture  stored  with  sheep, 
feeding  with  sober  security,  while  the  pretty  lambs,  with  bleating 
oratory,  craved  the  dam's  comfort ;  here  a  shepherd  piping  as 
though  he  would  never  be  old  ;  there  a  young  shepherdess  knit- 
ting and  withal  singing  ;  and  it  seemed  that  her  voice  comforted 
her  hands  to  work,  and  her  hands  kept  time  to  her  voice  music." 

Although  we  are  now  too  busy  and  business-like  to  indulge 
in  a  style  of  such  knightly  and  dainty  elaboration,  it  will  be 
readily  seen  that  the  language  itself  has  scarcely  changed  in 
three  hundred  years. 


6  The  English  Language. 

SIR    JOHN    FORTESCUE,    I470. 

"  It  hath  ben  often  seen  in  England  that  iij  or  ij  theves  for 
povertie  hath  sett  upon  vij  or  vj  true  men  and  robbed  them  al. 
But  it  hath  not  been  seen  in  France  that  vij  or  viij  theves  have 
ben  hardy  to  robbe  iij  or  iv  true  men.  Wherefore  it  is  right  seld 
that  Frenchmen  be  hangyed  for  robberye,  for  that  they  have  no 
hertys  to  do  so  terrible  an  acte.  There  be  therefor  mo  men 
hangyed  in  England  in  a  ^y^r*?  for  robberye  and  manslaughter  than 
there  /^<f  hangyd  in  Fraunce  for  such  cause  of  crime  in  vij  yers" 

SIR    JOHN    MANDEVILLE,  ABOUT    1370. 

"  The  prestes  of  that  temple  han  alle  here  wrytynges,  undre  the 
date  of  the /«!?«/ that  is  clept  Fenix  ;  and  there  is  non  but  on  in 
alle  the  world.  And  he  comethe  to  brenne  him  self  upon  the 
awtere  of  the  temple,  at  the  ende  of  J  hundred  3<?<?i^ '  .*  for  so  /i7«^tf 
he  lyvethe.  And  at  the  300  Zeres  ende,  the  prestes  arrayen  here 
awtere  honestly  and  putten  thereupon  spices  and  sulphur  vif  and 
other  thinges  that  wolen  brenne  lightly.  And  than  the  brid  Fenix 
comethe  and  brennethe  him  self  to  ashes.  And  the  first  day  next 
aftre^  men  fynden  in  the  ashes  a  worm  ;  and  the  secunde  day  next 
«//r<r,  men  funden  a  ^r/</  ^wy^  and  perfyt ;  and  the  thridde  day 
next  aftre,  he  fleethe  his  ze/^.  And  so  there  is  no  w*?  briddes  of 
that  kynde  in  «//<?  the  world,  but  it  allone.  And  treuly  that  is  a 
^r<?/  myracle  of  God.  And  men  may  well  /y^w^  that  ^ry^  unto 
God,  be  cause  that  there  nys  no  God  but  on,  and,  also,  that  oure 
lord  aroos  fro  dethe  to  />'Z'<f  the  thridde  day." 

PROCLAMATION    OF    HENRY    HI.,    I258. 

"  Henr*  thurZ  godes  fultume  King  on  Engleneloande.  Lhoauerd 
on  Yrloand'.  Duk  on  Norm*  on  Aquitain'  and  eorl  on  Aniow. 
Send  igretinge  io  alle  hise  halde  ilcerde  and  ileawede  on  Hunt- 
endon'  schir'  thcet  witen  3^  wel  alle  thcet  we  willen  and  vnnen 
that.  thcBt  vre  rcedesmen  alle  other  the  moare  dcel  of  heom  thcet 
beoth  ichosen  thurZ  us  and  thurZ  thcet  loandes  folk  on  vre  kun- 

'  This  character  (3)  here  represents  a  modification  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  g  much 
in  use  from  the  twelfth  to  the  fourteenth  century,  with  a  value  varying  from 
y  to  ghy  the  latter  no  longer  recognized  in  English. 


The  Instability  of  Language.  y 

eriche.  habbeth  idon  and  schullen  don  in  the  worthnesse  of  gode 
and  on  vre  treowthe.  for  the  freme'  of  the  loande.  thurZ  the 
besiZte  of  than  to  foreniseide  redesmen,  beo  stede/cest  and  ilestinde  in 
alle  thing  e  abut  en  ande." ' 

FROM    THE    "PETERBOROUGH    CHRONICLE,"   II50, 

"  And  te  eorl  of  Angceu  wcerd  ded,  and  his  sune  Henri  toe  to  the 
rice.  And  te  cuen  of  France  to-dcelde  fra  the  king  and  sees  com  to 
the  iunge  eorl  Henri ^  and  he  toe  hire  to  wive,  and  Peitou  mid  hire. 
thafcBrde  he  mid  micel  fcerdvaXo  Engleland  and  wan  castles — and 
te  "kingferde  agenes  him  mid  micel  mare  ferd,  thothwcethere  fuhtten 
he  noht,  oc  fcerdon  the  arcebiscop  and  te  wise  men  betwux  heom,  and 
makede  that  xa-^/^  that  /^  king  j^/^i?  ^^«  lauerd  and  king  w//^  he 
livede  and  ^/^r  his  </<^/  ware  Henri,  king." 

^LFRIC,    ABOUT    980. 

"  Gif  hwelc  man  hcefth  hund  sc^apa,  and  him  losath  dn  of  thdm, 
hii,  ne  forldett  he  //z^  «/^^«  and  hundnigontig  on  thdm  muntum,  and 
gdeth  and  j^V//^  //^^Z  dn  the  forwczrth  ?  And  ^z/"  /^/V  gelimpeth  thcet 
hi  hit fint,  sothlice  ic  secge  thett  hd  swythor geblissath  for  />^^/«  ^««w 
thonne  ofer  /i^dP  nigon  and  >^««</  nigontig  the  na  ne  losodon." 

Matthew  xviii.,  12-14. 

KING    ALFRED,    ABOUT    89O. 

"  Thcet  Edstland  is  swphe  mycel,  and  thcer  bith  swythe  manig 
burh,  and  on  celcere  by  rig  byth  cyninge  ;  and  thcer  bith  swythe  mycel 

'  This  is  often  called  the  oldest  extant  specimen  of  English  as  distinguished 
from  Anglo-Saxon  J  but  it  probably  represents  nothing  ever  really  spoken.  Its 
exaggerated  rusticity  is  the  clumsy  attempt  of  a  court  scribe  to  render  a  French 
original  into  the  speech  of  the  common  people.  In  this  and  the  following 
examples  I  have  used  the  modern  th  instead  of  the  single  letter  ikorn  (J>).  The 
passage  may  be  read  thus  : 

Henry,  through  God's  help,  King  in  England,  Lord  in  Ireland,  Duke  in 
Normandy,  in  Aquitain  and  Earl  in  Anjou,  sends  greeting  to  all  his  subjects, 
learned  and  lay,  in  Huntingdonshire.  This  know  ye  well  all,  that  we  will  and 
grant  that  which  our  counsellors  all  or  the  more  part  of  them  that  be  chosen 
through  us  and  through  the  landfolk  of  our  kingdom,  have  done  and  shall  do  to 
the  honor  of  God  and  our  allegiance,  for  the  good  of  the  land,  through  the 
determination  of  the  aforesaid  counsellors,  be  established  and  obeyed  in  all 
things  forever. 


8  The  English  Language, 

hunig,  and  fiscath ;  and  se  cyning  and  thd  ricostan  men  drincath 
myran  meolc  and  iha  unspidigan  and  thd  thedwan  drincath  inedo. 
Theer  hith  swathe  my  eel  gewinn  betmeonan  him  ;  and  ne  Mth  thcer 
ncenig  edlo  gebrowen  mid  Eastum,  ac  thcer  bith  medo  genoh."  * 

THE    VENERABLE    BEDE,    735. 

"  Fore  there  neid-fcsrae  ncenig  uuiurthet 
thonc-snottura,  than  him  tharf  sie 
to  ymb-hycgganncR,  cer  his  hin-iongce 
hucet  his  gasta,  godces  ceththa  yflcRS 
after  deoth-dcBge,  deemed  uueorthce.*'  * 

c'iEDMON,    A.D.    680. 

"  Hu  sculun  hergan  Now  we  shall  praise 

he/cen  ricas  uard  heaven's  kingdom's  ward, 

metudcBs  mcecti  the  Creator's  might, 

end  his  mod gidanc  and  his  mind's  thought 

uere  uuldur  fathur  men's  glorious  Father  ! 

sue  he  uundra  gihuees  as  of  all  wonders  he 

eci  drictin  eternal  Lord  ; 

or  astelidcB  from  the  beginning 

He  cerist  scop  He  first  made 

elda  barnum  for  earth's  children 

heben  till  hrofe  heaven  for  a  roof ; . 

haleg  scepen  holy  Creator  ! 

tha  middum  geard  then  mid-earth, 

mon  cynncBS  uard  mankind's  ward, 

eci  dry  din"  '  eternal  Lord. 

'  This  Eastland  is  very  large,  and  there  are  very  many  towns  there,  and 
kings  over  the  several  towns  ;  and  there  is  very  much  honey  and  fishing  there  ; 
and  the  king  and  the  richest  men  drink  mares'  milk,  and  the  poor  and  the  serfs 
drink  mead.     There  is  very  great  strife  between  them  ;    and  there  is  no  ale 
brewed  there  among  the  Esthonians,  but  there  is  mead  enough. 
*  Before  the  inevitable  journey  no  one  becomes 
More  thought-prudent  than  he  has  need 
To  ponder  ere  his  hence-going 
What  to  his  ghost,  of  good  or  of  evil, 
After  death-day,  adjudged  shall  be. 
'  This  is  reckoned  the  oldest  literary  Anglo-Saxon. 


The  Instability  of  Language,  9 

ULPHILAS,  ABOUT  A.D.  380. 

"  Yah  hairdyos  wesun  in  thamtna  samin  landa,  thairhwakandans 
yah  witandans  wahtwom  nahts  ufaro  hairdai  seinai.  Ith  aggtlus 
Frauyins  anaqam  ins,  yah  wulthus  Frauyins  biskain  ins  j  yah 
ohtedun  agisa  mikilamma.  Yah  qath  du  im  sa  aggilus,  JVi  ogeith  j 
unte  sat  f  spillo  izwis  faheid  mikila,  sei  wairthith  allai  mana- 
gein."^ — Luke,  ii.,  8. 

Our  English  tongue  has  thus  been  traced  step  by  step  to 
a  point  where  only  a  few  particles  remain  unchanged.  If 
now  the  German,  Dutch,  Danish,  Swedish  and  Icelandic 
were  followed  in  the  same  manner,  all  would  be  found  to 
converge  like  meridians  of  longitude.  Although  the  pole, 
to  continue  the  comparison,  may  never  be  reached,  the 
highest  latitude  thus  far  attained  is  the  Moeso-Gothic  of 
Ulphilas.  These  collectively  form  the  Teutonic  or  Gothic 
subfamily  of  languages.  Again,  if  the  Armorican,  Welsh, 
Cornish,  Manx,  Irish,  and  Gaelic  were  subjected  to  a  like 
treatment,  they  would  be  found  to  point  to  a  primitive,  but 
inaccessible  Celtic.  Fortunately  the  French,  Provencal, 
Spanish,  Portuguese,  Italian,  and  Wallachian  can  be  traced 
to  a  well-known  source,  designated  by  the  ancient  Romans 
as  the  Latin  Tongue.  We  can  go  one  step  farther,  and  dis- 
cover that  the  Latin,   Greek,   Teutonic,   Sclavonic,   Lithu- 

'  Ulfilas,  a  Goth  and  a  zealous  convert  to  Christianity,  conducted  a  colony 
across  the  Danube  about  A.  D.  376,  and  obtained  a  settlement  for  them  in  the 
Lower  Moesia,  the  modern  Bulgaria,  whence  they  were  sometimes  called  the 
Moeso-Goths.  He  translated  for  their  use  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  with 
the  exception  of  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings,  which  he  omitted  from  a 
belief  that  his  people  were  sufficiently  inclined  to  war  already.  This  great 
work,  the  first  ever  undertaken  in  their  language,  was  preserved  by  the  Visi- 
goths as  a  sacred  palladium  until  the  gth  century,  when  it  disappeared.  About 
the  end  of  the  15th  century,  a  part,  containing  nearly  the  whole  of  the  four 
Gospels,  was  discovered  in  an  abbey  in  Werden,  whence  it  was  afterwards  taken 
to  Prague.  The  .Swedes  captured  it  in  1648,  and  it  is  now  preserved  in  the 
University  Library  of  Upsala,  under  the  name  of  the  Codex  Argenteus  or  Silver 
Book,  the  letters  being  of  silver  laid  upon  purple  stained  vellum.  A  fac- 
simile may  be  seen  in  Bosworth's  "Gothic  and  Anglo-Saxon  Gospels/'  London, 
1865.  A  great  part  of  the  Epistles  were  also  discovered  in  a  monastery  in 
Lombardy  in  1818. 


lo  The  English  Language. 

anian,  Celtic,  Old  Persian,  and  the  dialects  of  the  Brahmanic 
nations  of  India  lead  to  a  single  unknown  original,  whose 
oldest  representative  is  the  Sanskrit  of  the  Vedas.  This 
very  large  group,  the  most  important  of  all  in  a  literary- 
point  of  view,  has  been  variously  designated  as  the  Indo- 
Germanic,  or  Indo-European,  but  is  now  best  known  as  the 
Aryan  family  of  languages.  No  valuable  results  have  been 
obtained  by  any  attempt  to  trace  its  genealogy  farther,  or 
to  combine  it  with  other  groups  in  a  wider  classification. 
Yet  among  the  innumerable  dialects  spoken  over  the  globe, 
several  more  or  less  distinct  family  groups  have  been  dis- 
covered. It  is  unnecessary  here  to  speak  of  more  than  one 
of  these  ;  but  that  one  ranking  very  high  in  the  extent  and 
importance  of  its  literature.  To  it  may  be  assigned  the 
speech  of  the  Babylonians,  Syrians,  Hebrews,  Arabians, 
Phoenicians,  Carthaginians,  and  Ethiopians.  The  whole  is 
known  as  the  Semitic,  or  Shemitish,  family,  from  a  belief 
that  the  several  peoples  named  were  descended  from  a 
common  ancestor  named  Sem  or  Shem.  These  people 
occupied  a  comparatively  small  area,  and  were  distinguished 
by  great  tenacity  and  fixity  of  ideas  and  habits.  Their 
languages  have  changed  less  rapidly,  and  so  resemble  each 
other  more  closely,  than  the  Aryan ;  and  they  have  been  of 
the  greatest  service  in  disclosing  the  general  principles  of 
language.  When  written,  they  have  no  vowels,  as  we 
understand  vowels ;  but  their  place  is  sometimes  supplied 
by  a  system  of  marks  called  vowel  points.  As  a  general 
rule,  the  words  are  conceived  to  be  derived  from  verbs,  and 
from  that  particular  form  of  the  verb  called  the  third  person 
singular,  masculine,  perfect  tense,  as  that  is  the  simplest, 
or  root  form.  It  is  generally  composed  of  three  consonants 
with  two  vowels  between,  the  first  a  long  a  and  the  second 
a  short  a.  There  is  indeed  a  considerable  number  of  two- 
letter  roots ;  and  there  has  been  considerable  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  whether  the  first  class  was  developed  from  the 
second,  or  the  latter  abbreviated  from  the  former.  The 
verb  has  two  tenses,  but  a  full  system  of  endings  for  the 
different  persons.     It  has  also  a  number  of  derivative  forms 


The  Instability  of  Language.  1 1 

called  conjugations,  which  bear  to  the  original  form  some- 
what the  same  relation  that  set  does  to  sit^  lay  to  lie,  or  fell 
to  fall.  The  declension  of  the  noun,  instead  of  being  of  a 
house,  to  a  house,  etc.,  is  my  house,  thy  house,  etc. ;  and  the 
appended  pronouns  have  been  so  far  preserved  that  they 
furnish  a  clue  to  the  meaning  and  origin  of  declension  and 
conjugation  in  all  other  languages.  The  derivation  of  all 
words  from  certain  root  forms,  which  could  generally  be 
identified  without  difficulty,  suggested  to  European  scholars 
the  idea  of  tracing  any  other  language  whatever  to  a  com- 
paratively small  number  of  roots. 


CHAPTER   II. 

THE  SOURCES  OF  ENGLISH. 

The  groundwork  of  English  is  the  language  of  those 
Teutonic  tribes  who,  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  over- 
ran a  great  part  of  Britain.  From  the  dreary  sandflats  and 
fens  of  Sleswick,  Holstein,  and  Friesland,  poured  in  succes- 
sion the  Jutes,  the  Angles,  and  the  Saxons.  The  first 
established  themselves  in  the  fertile  fields  of  Kent,  where 
their  memory  perished ;  the  second  possessed  the  North 
and  East,  and  gave  their  name  to  all  England — the  land  of 
the  Angles ;  the  last  founded  the  kingdoms  of  Essex, 
Wessex,  and  Sussex — the  East,  West,  and  South  Saxons. 
There  were  doubtless  differences  of  speech  among  them, 
which  will  account  in  part  for  the  variant  dialects  heard 
among  the  rural  population  of  England.  There  are  slight 
indications  that  the  speech  of  the  Angles  was  a  little  more 
like  modern  English  than  was  that  of  the  Saxons  ;  and  the 
Kentish  tongue  sounded  harsh  and  strange  to  Caxton  after 
nearly  a  thousand  years.  As  the  invasion  involved  the 
almost  total  extinction  or  expulsion  of  the  earlier  inhabi- 
tants from  the  districts  occupied,  but  few  British  or  Roman 
words  were  adopted  by  the  conquerors.  A  few  great  Roman 
works  for  which  the  strangers  had  no  names,  caused  the 
retention  of  such  words  as  street,  port,  chester,  wall,  and 
mile ;  the  few  British  women  reserved  as  household  drudges 
taught  their  captors  their  homely  names  for  crock  and  mug, 
ifor  m.aggot  and  spigot,  for  clout  and  cradle  and  bogle.  Upon 
this  foundation  of  Anglo-Saxon  there  was  first  laid  a  thin 
•stratum  of  Latin  by  the  Christian  missionaries  of  the  seventh 
century, — ^words  connected  chiefly  with  religion  and  morals. 


The  Sources  of  English.  13 

Next  followed  the  inroads  and  conquests  of  the  Northmen 
and  Danes,  begun  in  the  eighth  century,  and  continued  till 
within  twenty-four  years  of  the  Norman  Conquest.  As 
these  involved  permanent  settlements,  and  even  a  dynasty 
•  of  Danish  kings  of  England,  for  twenty-five  years,  their 
influence  must  have  been  very  considerable.  As  these 
northern  nations  were  closely  allied  to  the  earlier  conquerors, 
especially  to  the  Angles,  upon  whom  they  intruded  them- 
selves, their  respective  dialects  would  naturally  melt  together 
and  form  an  intermediate  speech,  smoothing  down  the 
special  peculiarities  of  each.  And  so  it  is  found  that  for 
several  succeeding  centuries,  for  which  there  are  literary 
remains,  the  dialect  of  the  North  differed  considerably  from 
that  of  the  Saxon  South  ;  and  something  of  that  difference 
is  observable  in  the  common  speech  of  the  people  to  this 
day.  The  general  effect  of  the  Danish  influence  was  to 
shorten  and  simplify  words  that  were  long  or  of  difficult 
utterance,  and  dropping  or  shortening  grammatical  forms. 
These  are  the  natural  results  of  combining  several  dialects. 
The  special  results  more  particularly  worth  mentioning  here 
were : 

1.  The  vowel-system  was  simplified.  Saxon  abounded  in 
compound  vowels — ae,  ea,  ei,  ie,  eo,  ia, — which  were  varied 
by  accents  placed  on  one  or  another  of  the  vowels.  Especial 
favorites  were  ea  and  eo,  in  which  the  sounds  are  supposed 
to  have  been  kept  separate.  I  cannot  but  think  that  these 
compound  vowels  added  considerably  to  the  labor  and  diffi- 
culty of  speech.  The  reader  may  practise  upon  geolewearte, 
a  nightingale,  giving  the  letters  any  value  he  pleases  that 
will  make  the  word  easy  to  pronounce.  The  Devonshire 
pronounciation  of  world,  for  example,  we'urld,  and  the 
ke'ow  of  rural  New  York  are  probably  genuine  Saxon 
survivals. 

2.  The  substitution  of  s  for  th — comes  instead  of  cometh — 
is  due  to  the  North  country. 

3.  The  present  pronouns  of  the  third  person  are  northern, 
and  not  the  original  Saxon  words,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  list 
presently  to  be  given. 


H 


The  English  Language, 


4.  Names  of  places  ending  in  -by,  a  dwelling  or  settle- 
ment ;  -wick,  or  -vick,  an  inlet  ;  -ey,  or  -ay,  an  island  ;  -holm, 
a  small  island ;  -thwaite,  a  lot  of  ground  ;  -garth,  an  enclos- 
ure ;  -ness,  a  cape ;  -thorpe,  village ;  -toft,  a  field  ;  -with,  a 
wood  ;  -wark,  a  fortress,  are  Scandinavian.  Zell's  maps  of 
England  and  Scotland  show  142  such  names  ;  and  these  are 
known  to  be  far  from  the  whole. 

The  following  are  a  few  words  from  the  Lindisfarne  Gos- 
pels, A.D.  950,  which  are  nearer  modern  English  than  the 
Saxon  of  the  same  period  : 


SAXON. 

ANGLIAN. 

MODERN. 

axode 

ascade 

asked 

breost 

brest 

breast 

bryd 

bird 

bird 

burh 

burug 

borough 

cymth 

cymmes 

comes 

deth 

does 

does 

duru 

dor 

door 

eart 

art 

art 

eom 

am 

am 

feor 

farra 

far 

fixas 

fisces 

fishes 

hi 

tha 

they 

hyra 

thaera 

their 

na  mara 

noht  mara 

not  more 

se 

the 

the 

sealt 

salt 

salt 

seoc 

sek 

sick 

slaepth 

slepes 

sleeps 

SUDU 

sona 

son 

synt 

arc 

are 

The  Angles  seem  to  have  been  superior  intellectually  to 
the  Saxons.  In  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  they  were 
the  first  of  Teutonic  peoples  in  learning  and  civilization. 
Their  language  had  made  the  greatest  advances  towards 
modern  simplicity  of  structure  ;  and  the  compositions  of 
Caedmon  and  others  were  so  highly  esteemed  that  the  Saxons 
of  the   South  were  fain  afterwards  to  call  their  language 


The  Sources  of  English.  15 

English.  Bede,  the  greatest  scholar  and  most  prolific  writer 
of  the  age,  and  Alcuin,  invited  to  enlighten  the  court  of 
Charlemagne,  were  Angles  of  Northumberland.  But  the 
heathen  Danes  and  Northmen  destroyed  their  monasteries 
and  burned  their  libraries  ;  and  only  fragments  remain  of 
their  venerable  literature. 

In  the  year  1066  the  supremacy  in  England  passed  to  the 
Normans.  They  were  originally  of  the  same  northern 
stock  that  had  kept  England  in  tribulation  two  hundred  and 
fifty  years ;  but  they  had  been  settled  long  enough  in  the 
north  of  France  to  acquire  its  language  ;  and  in  courtliness 
of  manners  and  the  arts  of  war  they  surpassed  all  other 
Teutonic  peoples.  Great  as  was  the  effect  of  this  event,  it 
was  probably  less,  and  less  direct,  than  is  generally  sup- 
posed. French  speech  and  manners  were  cultivated  in 
England  before  the  Conquest,  and  the  Saxon  language  con- 
tinued long  after  it.  Edward  the  Confessor  had  been 
brought  up  in  Normandy,  and  he  bestowed  the  highest 
places  in  the  realm  upon  Norman  favorites.  Hume  says  of 
this  reign : 

"  The  court  of  England  was  soon  filled  with  Normans,  who, 
being  distinguished  both  by  the  favor  of  Edward,  and  by  a  de- 
gree of  cultivation  superior  to  that  which  was  attained  by  the 
English  in  those  ages,  soon  rendered  their  language,  customs, 
and  laws  fashionable  in  the  kingdom.  The  study  of  the  French 
tongue  became  general  among  the  people.  The  courtiers 
affected  to  imitate  that  nation  in  their  dress,  equipage,  and 
entertainments  ;  even  the  lawyers  employed  a  foreign  language 
in  their  deeds  and  papers." 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Conquest  did  not  exterminate  the 
Saxons,  suppress  their  language,  or  abolish  their  customs. 
For  a  conquered  people  their  situation  might  have  been 
quite  tolerable,  if  they  had  not  risen  in  revolt  against  the 
Conqueror.  The  body  of  the  Saxon  people,  always  very 
greatly  in  the  majority,  were  at  least  permitted  to  live,  fol- 
low their  usual  occupations,  and  speak  their  mother  tongue. 
The  two  languages  were  long  kept  distinct,  as  two  streams 


1 6  The  English  Language. 

confined  in  one  channel  will  sometimes  flow  for  a  distance 
side  by  side,  without  mingling  their  waters,  yet  at  last  be- 
come inseparably  mixed.  The  Saxon  Chronicle  was  kept 
up  till  A.D.  1 1 54,  and  adopted  only  14  foreign  words  in  88 
years.  The  "  Ormulum,"  written  about  the  year  1200,  is  a 
metrical  .  paraphrase  of  the  Gospels,  containing  20,000 
lines.  It  was  130  years  after  the  Conquest,  yet  the  author 
admitted  only  five  or  six  French  words.  Layamon's  "  Brut," 
written  a  few  years  later,  is  a  metrical  history  of  Britain, 
largely  mythical,  containing  32,200  lines.  Although  in 
the  main  a  translation  from  the  French,  and  so  offering  the 
greatest  inducement  to  borrow  foreign  phrases,  it  has  only 
104  French  words,  not  counting  repetitions.  That  is  at  a 
rate  of  one  to  309  lines.  Scott's  "  Lady  of  the  Lake  "  has 
a  ratio  400  times  as  great,  so  that  the  flood  of  French  words 
must  have  come  into  English  long  after  the  Conquest.  Yet 
we  see  that  the  "  Brut  "  had  eleven  times  as  large  a  propor- 
tion of  foreign  words  as  the  earlier  and  more  purely  English 
poem.  If  we  then  pass  to  the  versified  "  Chronicle  of  Robert 
of  Gloucester,"  also  a  translation  from  the  French,  finished 
about  1295,  we  shall  find  the  foreign  words  six  times  as 
numerous  as  in  Layamon.  Still  they  are  sixty  times  less 
numerous  than  in  modern  English.  And  yet  the  close  of 
the  "Chronicle  "  comes  almost  to  modern  times.  It  is  longer 
after  the  conquest  than  from  the  accession  of  Charles  II.  to 
the  present  time.  Jerusalem  had  then  been  won  and  lost 
by  successive  crusades,  and  Marco  Polo  was  telling  Europe 
of  the  wonders  of  the  farthest  East. 

Nevertheless,  the  Norman  Conquest  and  the  relentless 
severity  used  in  suppressing  repeated  insurrections  influ- 
enced deeply  the  language  and  institutions  of  England. 
But  the  influence  of  the  French  was  complicated  with  that 
of  the  Latin  tongue.  Latin  was  the  language  of  the  Church 
and  of  religion  through  all  western  Europe ;  and  as  few 
laymen  were  educated,  reading  and  writing  were  mostly  the 
work  of  ecclesiastics,  and  in  great  part  Latin.  In  England 
Gildas,  who  had  seen  the  Saxon  invasion,  wrote  a  short  history 
in  Latin,  and  Bede,  in  the  eighth  century,  composed  forty- 


The  Sou7xes  of  English.  l*j 

one  separate  treatises  in  that  language.  Almost  everything 
of  grave  and  solemn  importance  was  written  in  Latin  down 
to  the  fifteenth  century.  This  continual  use  of  Latin  by 
the  learned  naturally  prevented  the  cultivation  of  the  native 
tongue. 

So  long  as  Saxon  and  Norman  remained  ununited,  Nor- 
man-French was  the  language  of  the  king  and  his  court,  of 
the  swarms  of  adventurers  that  came  over  seeking  lucrative 
places  in  England — of  the  only  society  that  possessed  power 
or  influence  and  dictated  the  fashions.  It  was  required  to 
be  employed  in  all  schools,  and  thus  made  the  only  medium 
through  which  other  learning  could  be  acquired.  The  pro- 
ceedings in  Parliament  and  the  courts  of  justice,  all  public 
acts,  charters,  and  documents  from  the  Conquest  to  the 
thirty-sixth  year  of  Edward  IIL,  a  period  of  296  years,  were 
required  to  be  in  the  same  language.  At  that  time  Edward, 
having  good  reason  for  desiring  to  make  one  united  people 
from  the  discordant  races  under  his  sceptre,  had  it  enacted 
that  for  the  future  all  pleadings  in  courts  should  be  in  Eng- 
lish, but  the  court  records  in  Latin.  Some  think  that  these 
records  had  always  been  in  Latin.  However  that  may  be,  the 
records  of  the  courts  and  the  writs  issued  by  them  continued 
to  be  in  Latin  until  the  fourth  year  of  George  IL  It  had 
then  become  customary  to  attach  to  a  writ  a  note  in  English 
to  explain  what  it  was  about.  Notwithstanding  the  statute 
of  Edward  III.,  the  lawyers  were  so  accustomed  to  their 
old  Norman-French  that  they  continued  to  employ  it  in 
making  up  their  reports  of  cases  adjudged  ;  and  law  reports 
were  so  written  until  the  reign  of  Charles  II.  And  thus  it 
comes  about  that  law  books  and  proceedings  are  full  of  ob- 
solete French  and  barbarous  Latin.  Nothing  shows  better 
the  small  figure  once  made  in  English  law  by  the  English 
language  than  legal  maxims — those  gems  of  juridical  wisdom 
all  compact,  gathered  by  the  industry,  and  polished  by  the 
wit  of  eight  centuries.  Out  of  2,169  given  in  Bouvier's  "  Law 
Dictionary,"  2,037  ^^"^  '"  Latin  31  in  French,  and  loi  in 
English. 

But,  to  return  to  the  effects  01  the  Conquest,  the  Saxon 


1 8  The  English  Language. 

language  was  depressed  as  much  as  Norman-French  was 
exalted.  A  great  part  of  the  native  nobility  and  gentry  per- 
ished either  in  the  first  shock  of  battle  or  in  the  repeated 
revolts  and  disturbances  that  followed  ;  or  they  were  com- 
pelled to  go  into  exile.  Nearly  all  positions  of  honor, 
power,  or  profit  were  conferred  upon  Normans.  The  Saxons 
were  crushed,  despised,  and  impoverished  by  taxes,  fines, 
and  a  sweeping  confiscation  of  estates.  To  the  exactions  of 
the  early  Norman  kings  were  added  the  arrogance  and  out- 
rages of  the  Norman  barons.  The  "  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle  " 
gives  the  following  graphic  account  of  the  state  of  things  in 
the  reign  of  Stephen.  I  preserve  the  quaint  old  phraseology 
so  far  as  it  can  be  made  intelligible : 

"  When  the  traitors  understood  that  he  was  a  mild  man  and 
good  and  soft  and  executed  not  no  justice,  then  did  they  all 
wonders.  They  had  made  homage  to  him,  and  sworn  oaths,  and 
they  no  truth  held  not.  All  they  were  forsworn,  and  their  troths 
forlost.  For  every  mighty  man  made  his  castles  and  held  against 
him,  and  filled  the  land  full  of  castles.  They  tasked  sorely  the 
wretched  men  of  the  land  with  castle  works.  .When  the  castles  were 
made,  then  filled  they  them  with  devils*nd  evil  men.  Then  took 
they  the  men  that  they  weened  had  any  goods,  both  by  night  and 
by  day,  men  and  women,  and  did  them  in  prison  after  gold  and 
silver,  and  pined  them  with  unspeakable  pining  ;  for  there  never 
were  no  martyrs  so  pined  as  they  were.  They  hanged  men  up  by 
the  feet  and  smoked  them  with  foul  smoke.  They  hanged  men 
by  the  thumbs,  and  others  by  the  head,  and  hung  corselets  on 
their  feet.  They  did  knotted  strings  about  their  heads,  and 
writhed  them  together  that  it  went  to  the  brains.  They  did  them 
in  prison  wherein  were  adders,  snakes,  and  paddocks,  and  killed 
them  so.  Some  they  put  in  the  torment-house,  that  is  in  a  chest 
that  was  short,  narrow,  and  un-deep,  and  did  sharp  stones  therein, 
and  squeezed  the  man  therein  and  brake  all  his  limbs.  In  many  of 
the  castles  were  *lof  &  grin'  that  were  rack-irons,  that  two  or  three 
men  had  enough  to  carry  one,  that  was  so  made,  that  is  fastened  to 
abeam.  And  they  did  a  sharp  iron  about  the  man's  throat  and 
neck,  that  he  might  not  nowhitherwards,  nor  sit,  nor  lie,  nor  sleep, 
but  bear  all  that  iron.     Many  thousands  they  killed  with  hunger. 


The  Sources  of  English.  19 

"  I  can  not  nor  I  may  not  tell  all  the  wonders  that  they  did 
wretched  men  in  this  land.  And  that  lasted  the  XIX  winters 
while  Stephen  was  king ;  and  ever  it  was  worse  and  worse.  They 
laid  tributes  on  the  towns  every  now  and  then  and  called  it  ten- 
serie.  When  the  wretched  men  had  not  nothing  more  to  give, 
then  they  reaved  them  and  burned  all  the  dwellings  ;  and  well  thou 
mightest  fare  all  a  day's  fare  and  shouldest  thou  never  find  man 
abiding  in  a  house,  nor  land  tilled.  Then  was  corn  dear,  and 
flesh  and  cheese  and  butter,  for  none  was  not  in  the  land. 
Wretched  men  died  of  hunger.  Some  went  on  alms  that  erewhile 
were  rich  men,  and  some  fled  out  of  the  land." 

No  literature  except  a  chronicle  of  horrors  could  thrive 
amid  such  surroundings.  Accordingly  with  the  exception  of 
the  above  "  Chronicle,"  the  scanty  remains  of  English  litera- 
ture are  chiefly  a  few  homilies  in  prose  and  verse,  without  vigor 
of  thought,  elegance  of  expression,  or  elevation  of  sentiment. 
The  wisdom  and  the  long  reign  of  Henry  11. ,  did  much  to 
advance  England  as  a  nation  and  prevent  the  oppression  of 
one  race  by  another.  Thenceforward  each  generation  saw 
the  parting  chasm  closing  up.  Still  in  regard  to  language 
French  had  everything  in  its  favor,  and  was  almost  as  indis- 
pensable to  a  person  of  any  ambitious  aspirations  as  English 
now  is  to  the  native  acres  of  India.  Higdon,  writing  in  the 
time  of  Richard  II.,  shows  the  general  eagerness  to  learn 
French : 

"  Also  gentlemen's  children  are  taught  to  speak  French  from 
the  time  that  they  are  rocked  in  their  cradles,  or  able  to  play  with 
a  child's  brooch  ;  and  country  people  try  to  ape  the  gentry,  and 
eagerly  desire  to  speak  French,  so  as  to  be  taken  more  account  of. 
This  practice  has  lately  somewhat  changed.  For  John  Comewal, 
a  teacher  of  Grammar,  changed  the  instruction  in  the  Grammar 
School  from  French  to  English  ;  and  Richard  Pencrych  learned 
that  way  of  teaching  from  him,  and  other  men  from  Pencrych  ; 
so  that  now,  in  the  year  of  Our  Lord  one  thousand  three  hundred 
and  eighty-five,  the  ninth  of  the  second  king  Richard  after  the 
conquest ;  in  all  the  Grammar  Schools  of  England  children  leave 
French  and  construe  and  learn  in  English." 


20  The  English  Language. 

All  this  time  in  the  seclusion  of  the  monasteries  a  con- 
siderable number  of  historical  and  other  works,  sometimes 
taking  a  very  wide  range,  were  written  in  Latin.  Higdon 
himself  wrote  in  that  language,  and  the  names  of  Geoffrey 
of  Monmouth,  Henry  of  Huntingdon,  John  of  Salisbury, 
Mathew  of  Paris,  Roger  of  Wendover,  and  William  of 
Malmesbury  may  be  instanced. 

About  the  year  1200  were  written  two  poems,  widely  dif- 
ferent from  each  other,  but  far  superior  to  anything  of  the 
kind  since  the  early  Anglican  Caedmon,  and  both  of  great 
importance  for  the  study  of  early  English.  A  monk  named 
Ormin  composed  a  long  poem  on  the  Jewish  and  Christian  re- 
ligions, and  called  it  the  "  Ormulum,"  in  imitation  of  his  own 
name.  He  must  have  been  a  man  of  very  strongly  marked 
individuality,  for  he  undertook  not  only  to  write  in  purely 
Saxon  English,  but  also  to  write  phonetically,  by  doubling 
the  consonant  after  every  short  vowel.  This  was  the  last 
considerable  work  that  made  any  attempt  to  exclude  French. 
I  give  here  a  very  short  specimen. 

"  &  nu  ice  wile  shsewenn  3uw 

summ-del  wif]'  Godess  hellpe 
Off  I'att  Judisskenn  follkess  lac 

fatt  Drihhtin  wass  full  cvveme, 
&  mikell  hellpe  to  fe  folic, 

to  laeredd  &  to  laewedd, 
Biforenn  fatt  te  Laferrd  Crist 

was  borenn  her  to  manne." 

And  now  I  will  show  you 

Something,  with  God's  help 
Of  that  Jewish  people's  worship 

That  to  the  Lord  was  very  acceptable 
And  much  help  to  the  people, 

To  learned  and  to  unlearned, 
Before  that  the  Lord  Christ 

Was  bom  here  a  man. 

The  other  poem,  entitled  "The  Brut,"  was  by  a  priest 
named  Lasamon  (pronunciation  uncertain,  oftener  written 


The  Sources  of  English. 


21 


Layamon).  It  is  a  mythical  history  of  Britain  from  the  sack 
of  Troy  to  King  Athelstan.  Brut  is  a  descendant  of  ^neas, 
who  after  incredible  adventures  lands  in  Britain,  to  which 
he  gives  its  name.  The  poem  is  an  amplified  translation  of 
a  Norman-French  poem  of  the  same  name  ;  itself  a  transla- 
tion from  the  Latin  original  by  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth. 


**  pa  3et  spsec  Haengest : 
Lauerd  ich  wulle  \m.  iwil : 
&  don  al  mine  daede  : 
Nu  ic  wulle  biliue  : 
&  sefter  mire  dohter  : 
&  aefter  ohte  mo«nen  : 
and  f  u  3if  me  swa  muchel  lond  : 
swa  wule  anes  bule  hude  : 
feor  from  aelche  castle  : 
***** 

Of    }>ere   hude   he   kserf    enne 

]>wong  : 
ne  sfe  fwong  noht  swiSe  braed  ; 
pa  ai  islit  wes  ]>e  ]>ong  : 
a-buten  he  bilaede  : 

Then  yet  spoke  Hengist : 

Lord,  I  will  thy  pleasure  : 

And  do  all  my  deeds  : 

Now  I  will  quickly  : 

And  after  my  daughter  : 

And  after  brave  men  : 

If  thou  give  me  so  much  land  : 

As  will  a  bull's  hide  : 

Far  from  each  castle : 


cnihten  aire  hendest, 

dri3e«  her  &  ouer-al. 

aefter  ]nne  raede. 

sende  after  mine  wiue. 

J>e  me  is  swa  deore. 

fa  bezste  of  mine  cunne. 

to  stonden  a  mire  a3ere  ho«d. 

aelches  weies  ouer-spraeden. 

amidden  ane  ualde. 

***** 

swiSe  smal  &  swiSe  long. 

buten  swulc  a  twines  frsed. 
he  wes  wunder  ane  long, 
muche  del  of  londe." 

of  all  knights  courtliest, 
do  here  and  everywhere, 
after  thy  counsel, 
send  after  my  wife, 
that  to  me  is  so  dear, 
the  best  of  my  kinsmen, 
to  stand  in  my  holding, 
each  way  overspread, 
in  midst  of  a  wood. 


Of  the  hide  he  cut  a  thong : 
The  thong  was  not  very  broad 
When  slit  was  all  the  thong  ; 
And  about  it  spread  around  : 


very  small  and  very  long, 
but  such  as  a  thread  of  twine, 
it  then  was  wondrous  long, 
a  mighty  deal  of  ground. 


From    this   time   onward   translations  and  imitations  of 
French  works  became  more  and  more  frequent,  and  have 


22  The  English  Language, 

never  once  ceased  to  this  day.  In  the  thirteenth  century- 
French  had  become  the  Hterary  language  of  Europe ;  and 
nearly  all  that  was  worth  reading  for  amusement  was  derived 
from  that  source.  It  is  not  from  the  Norman  conquerors 
but  from  seven  centuries  of  contact  with  French  literature 
that  we  receive  the  greater  part  of  the  French  words  in  our 
language.  Mr.  Kington  Oliphant  says  of  the  period  from 
1 220  to  1303: 

"  English  was  cast  aside  as  something  vulgar,  and  nearly  every 
cultivated  writer  in  our  island  betook  himself  to  French  or  Latin  ; 
our  tongue  almost  lost  its  noble  power  of  compounding,  and 
parted  with  thousands  of  old  words.  A  very  few  translations 
from  French  and  Latin  kept  a  feeble  light  burning  during  these 
baleful  years.  In  Age  III.,  1 280-1303,  English  writers  transla- 
ted copiously  from  the  French,  though  they  gave  birth  to  noth- 
ing original ;  they  thus  stopped  the  decay  of  our  fast  perishing 
language,  and  French  words  in  shoals  were  brought  in  to  supply 
the  place  of  the  English  lost." 

But  it  is  not  words  alone  that  we  have  thus  acquired. 
French  examples  have  influenced  our  pronunciation,  spell- 
ing, and  grammatical  and  literary  forms.  The  following  are 
a  few  of  the  most  easily  distinguishable  features  due  in 
whole  or  in  part  to  French  influence : 

1.  The  prevalence  of  the  hissing  sound  with  which  our 
language  is  reproached — the  sounds  which  we  represent  by 
sh,  ch,  and  j,  the  sibilant  sound  of  c,  the  almost  universal 
ending  of  the  plural  in  .y,  the  verbal  ending  in  s — goes  and 
speaks  instead  of  goeth  and  speaketh. 

2.  The  loss  of  the  guttural  sound  represented  in  Saxon  by 
h,  and  in  later  English  by  gh. 

3.  The  loss  of  a  very  useful  character  ]>,  and  the  substitu- 
tion of  two  letters  {tli)  in  its  place. 

4.  Ownership  expressed  by  of — "  the  house  ^/"the  planter," 
instead  of  "the  planter's  house." 

5.  Comparison  of  adjectives  by  more  and  most — "the 
most  beautiful,"  instead  of  Carlyle's  "  beautifullest." 

6.  The  placing  of  the  adjective  after  the  noun,  or  giving 


TIu  Sources  of  English.  23 

it  a  plural  form — sign  manual,  letters  patent,  courts  martial, 
Knights  Templars. 

7.  You  instead  of  thou. 

8.  The  union  of  a  verb  and  noun — drawbridge,  cutpurse. 
They  are  not  very  numerous ;  and  the  latest  coinages — 
know-nothing,  push-cart,  grip-sack^  do  not  make  us  wish  them 
more  plentiful. 

9,  The  anomalous  expressions ;  *'  It  is  me^''  "  That's  him." 

10,  Rhyme  and  the  modern  system  of  versification.  The 
earliest  English  poetry  depended  neither  on  rhyme,  accent, 
nor  measure,  but  on  alliteration,  that  is,  identity  of  initial 
sounds.  This  was  natural  with  the  Saxons  and  Scandinavi- 
ans, because,  as  a  rule,  all  words  were  accented  on  the  first 
syllable.     In  an  old  poem  on  the  deluge,  God  says  to  Noah : 

"  Naf  holies  ther-inne,  &  halkes  ful  mony, 
jffoth  ^oskes  &  <5oures,  &  wel  /5ounden  penes  ; 
For  I  schal  waken  up  a  water  to  wasch  alle  the  te/orlde." 

Two  populations  of  kindred  blood  and  a  common  worship, 
and  occupying  the  same  country,  could  not  remain  separate 
and  hostile  forever.  Social  and  family  ties  began  slowly  to 
draw  together  Saxon  and  Norman.  The  wisdom  and  vigor 
of  some  of  the  Norman  kings,  the  baseness  and  imbecility 
of  others — the  generosity,  bravery,  and  wrongs  of  Richard, 
the  futile  tyranny  of  John,  the  splendid  victories  of  Crecy 
and  Poictiers  and  the  sight  of  two  captive  kings  in  London 
at  once — diverted  the  thoughts  of  men  from  the  question  of 
race,  and  taught  them  to  sympathize,  resist,  and  feel  a  com- 
mon pride  together.  It  was  during  the  fourteenth  century 
that  the  varied  population  of  England  became  one  people, 
speaking  one  language,  still  easily  understood  by  the  intelli- 
gent reader.  In  this  age  of  rapid  transit  and  sudden  revo- 
lution we  are  struck  with  the  slowness  of  progress  a  few 
centuries  ago.  It  was  two  hundred  and  ninety-seven  years 
after  the  Conquest  that  Edward  III.,  in  his  anger  against 
France  and  desire  to  unite  all  his  subjects  against  that 
nation,  abolished  the  use  of  the  French  language  in  legal 
pleadings  and  public  acts.     Still  time  was  necessary  to  give 


24  The  English  Language. 

full  effect  to  the  law,  and  the  oldest  public  document  in 
English  preserved  in  Rymer's  "  Federa"  is  twenty-three  years 
later.  We  have  seen,  too,  that  English  was  not  admitted 
into  the  schools  until  the  reign  of  Richard  11. 

What,  then,  was  the  character  of  this  early  English,  and 
of  what  elements  was  it  composed  ?  As  the  great  body  of 
the  people  were  Anglo-Saxon,  we  may  safely  infer  on  a  very 
general  principle  that  they  furnished  the  framework  of  the 
language.  If  a  people  whose  principal  intercourse  is  with 
each  other  have  occasion  to  borrow  words  from  a  second 
people  they  will  be  chiefly  names  of  things^  especially  of  new 
things  for  which  they  could  have  no  native  names,  just  as 
we  have  picked  up  such  words  as  caravan,  indigOy  chintZy 
manna,  alkali,  bamboo,  gorilla,  jalap,  canoe,  moccasin.  Next 
they  would  adopt  words  expressing  actions,  especially  pro- 
cesses unknown  before,  and  lastly  words  expressive  of  qualities. 
The  little  words  that  express  nothing  by  themselves,  but 
are  of  wondrous  convenience — the,  he,  it,  any,  what,  why,  ifi, 
to,  of,  if,  and,  but,  though,  yet, — the  winged  words  that  save 
labor,  the  articles  and  particles  that  express  time,  number, 
relations,  and  conditions — there  would  be  no  need  to  borrow. 
People  are  satisfied  with  what  they  have  already.  Of  the 
hundreds  of  words  which  our  present  English  has  borrowed 
from  extra-European  sources,  all  but  three  are  names,  or 
what  grammarians  call  nouns.  Of  these  three,  two — shampoo 
and  tattoo — are  verbs,  that  is,  express  actions.  The  third — 
taboo — is  an  adjective,  an  expression  of  quality — sacred  or 
devoted  to  the  gods.  So  of  600  French  words  found  in 
"  Robert  of  Gloucester,"  386  are  nouns,  140  verbs,  68  adjec- 
tives, and  6  of  all  other  kinds.  The  last  six  are  all  made  of 
nouns  or  nouns  and  particles  ;  and  only  two  of  them — because 
and  piecemeal — are  still  in  use.  This  will  give  a  fair  idea  of 
the  kind  of  words,  grammatically,  that  were  introduced  from 
French  and  Latin. 

Another  effect  of  commingling  languages  would  take  the 
form  of  loss  and  not  of  acquisition.  A  word,  while  still  re- 
maining the  same  word,  may  have  little  appendages  affixed  to 
the  beginning  or  the  end,  or  it  may  undergo  internal  changes. 


The  Sources  of  English.  25 


"boy 

boy-s 

ox 

ox-en 

sing 

sing-s 

child 

children 

love 

loved 

speak 

spoken 

This  phenomenon  is  known  by  the  general  name  of  inflexion ; 
and  some  languages  have  much  more  of  it  than  others.  In 
some  a  word  may  have  several  hundred  or  even  a  thousand 
forms ;  and  in  such  cases  a  knowledge  of  them  forms  the 
greatest  part  of  what  is  called  grammar.  English  has  now 
only  remnants  and  traces  of  a  system  once  much  more 
extensive.  Both  Anglo-Saxon  and  Norman-French  had  in- 
flexional systems  much  more  largely  developed,  but  quite 
unlike  and  incapable  of  combining  to  any  great  extent.  The 
greater  part  was  dropped  altogether.  When  people  under- 
stand each  other  imperfectly  they  cannot  preserve  a  multi- 
tude of  niceties.  The  ear  catches  the  essential  part  of  the 
word,  and  gives  little  heed  to  the  ever  changing  termination. 
This  neglect  was  the  more  effective  as  the  accent  was  gen- 
erally near  the  beginning  of  each  word  and  the  termination 
pronounced  indistinctly.  The  colored  race  in  this  country 
when  first  emancipated  afforded  an  amusing  illustration  of 
this.  They  could  not  be  got  to  utter  the  parts  of  words 
that  preceded  or  were  far  from  the  accent.  Ascription, 
description,  inscription,  prescription,  were  all  alike  scription 
and  nothing  more. 

It  is  often  questioned  which  is  the  best  preserved  part  of 
a  language,  and,  consequently,  the  best  evidence  of  ancient 
relationship,  the  words  or  the  grammatical  forms.  This 
question,  I  think,  does  not  admit  of  a  general  and  absolute 
answer.  Much  depends  on  circumstances.  The  principle 
might  be  presented  in  the  form  of  a  supposed  case.  If  people 
of  two  races  A  and  B,  capable  of  friendly  union,  be  placed 
together  on  an  island,  a  mixed  language  will  result.  Suppose 
the  people  of  A  to  outnumber  those  of  B  ten  to  one,  but  the 
intelligence  of  B  to  be  ten  times  the  greatest ;  and  further 
suppose  them  so  far  intermingled  that  the  learned  B's  talk 
chiefly  with  the  ignorant  A's ;  then  the  grammatical  system 
of  A  will  survive  in  a  simplified  form,  and  words  will  be  bor- 


26  The  English  Language. 

rowed  from  B,  according  to  necessity  or  fancy.  Much  de- 
pends on  the  relative  numbers  brought  into  intimate  contact. 
There  are  instances  of  small  numbers  belonging  to  ancient 
races,  scattered  among  large  populations,  who  retain  more 
or  less  of  their  ancestral  words,  which  they  use  according  to 
the  grammatical  system  of  the  country.  The  Armenians 
scattered  through  Asia  Minor  are  said  to  use  native  words 
with  a  Turkish  grammar.  A  German  Jew  will  say  to  his 
wife  :  "  Ich  habe  noch  haiyom  lo  gQ-achalt  " — "  I  have  not 
eaten  anything  to-day  yet."  I  distinguish  the  Hebrew  por- 
tions by  italics,  but  the  structure  of  the  sentence  is  purely 
German.  A  very  interesting  example  is  furnished  by  the 
gypsies,  who  have  a  considerable  vocabulary  of  their  own, 
but  are  too  much  scattered  to  maintain  a  grammatical  5,ys- 
tem.  In  Spain  their  grammar  is  Spanish.  All  their  verbs 
are  of  the  first  Spanish  conjugation,  which  they  follow  in  all 
its  great  extent  and  complexity.  In  England  they  adopt  the 
very  simple  structure  of  the  English  language.  The  follow- 
ing is  from  a  song  of  the  English  gypsies  given  by  George 
Borrow  : 

"  We  Jaws  to  the  drab-engro  ker, 

Trin  Jwrse\\ox\}sx  there  of  drab  we  lels, 

And  when  to  the  swety  back  we  wels. 

We  pens  we  '11  drab  the  baulo." 

We  goes  to  the  poison-master'' s  house, 
Three  J>ennywoTth  there  of  poison  we  buys^ 
And  when  to  the  folks  back  we  comes. 
We  says  we  '11  poison  the  pig. 

Here  are  merely  single  gypsy  words  in  a  setting  of  pure 
English.  The  grammar  is  furnished  by  the  majority ;  the 
words  by  those  who  know  most.  And  again,  words  are 
gathered  by  wide  intercourse  ;  grammatical  form^  are  de- 
veloped by  isolation.  People  who  go  round  the  world  in 
sixty  days  will  not  wait  to  transform  a  single  word  into  a 
thousand  shapes. 

Having  seen  that  the  words  adopted  by  the  English  were 
chiefly   significant    ones,    representing   things,    actions,   and 


The  Sources  of  English.  27 

qualities,  we  may  next  inquire,  for  what  kind  of  things, 
qualities,  and  actions  they  found  it  necessary  to  borrow 
words  from  French  and  Latin — these  two  being  almost  in- 
separably connected.  The  necessity  arose  from  two  causes 
— the  loss  of  native  words,  and  the  access  of  new  objects 
and  ideas. 

We  may  assume  that  any  language,  however  limited  and 
threadbare,  can,  by  combining,  recombining,  and  modifying 
its  words,  develop  expressions  for  all  human  thoughts.  Yet 
all  cannot  do  this  equally  well.  We  know  the  unlimited 
copiousness  of  modern  German ;  and  Anglo-Saxon,  a  sister 
tongue,  might,  under  favorable  circumstances,  have  become 
equally  rich.  There  was  a  considerable  literature  before  the 
Conquest,  and,  by  compounding  the  native  words,  writers 
were  able  to  say  all  that  they  had  occasion  for.  They  had 
especially  an  ample  stock  of  words  for  representing  the 
emotions  and  ethical  ideas.  I  do  not  raise  the  question  here 
whether  those  words  would  always  commend  themselves  to 
our  eyes  or  ears,  but  they  served  the  purpose  intended.  But 
after  the  Conquest,  literature  ceased  almost  wholly.  Only  a 
very  few  cloistered  monks  read  and  wrote.  Books  and  the 
language  of  books  were  forgotten.  The  great  body  of  the 
Saxon  people  were  in  the  condition  of  a  low  type  of  farm 
laborers  ;  and  it  is  but  a  small  part  of  a  language  that  such 
people  have  occasion  for.  Marsh  thinks  that  one  half  of  the 
language  had  disappeared  before  the  year  1300.'  Successive 
literary  specimens  show  an  ever  decreasing  native  vocabulary, 
deficiencies  being  supplied  at  will  from  French  or  Latin.  But 
the  condition  of  the  Saxons  left  them  at  liberty  to  preserve 
a  multitude  of  words  belonging  to  every-day  rustic  life,  which 
are  still  heard  in  every  hamlet  and  rural  district  where  the 
English  tongue  is  spoken.  The  names  for  the  family  rela- 
tions and  the  domestic  animals  are  Saxon.  I  give  here  some 
examples  of  a  more  miscellaneous  character,  merely  to  show 

'  "  A  careful  examination  of  several  letters  of  Bosworth's  Anglo-Saxon  Dic- 
tionary gives,  in  2,000  words  (including  derivatives  and  compounds,  but  excluding 
orthographic  variants),  535  which  still  exist  as  modern  English  words." 

Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  viii.,  390. 


28 


The  English  Language. 


more  distinctly  the  kind  of  words  that  serfs  and  rustic  labor- 
ers were  in  a  condition  to  preserve : 


land 

tree 

sickle 

to  hew 

hill 

grass 

spade 

to  delve 

dale 

hay 

rake 

to  sow 

marsh 

fodder 

axe 

to  reap 

field 

thistle 

hammer 

to  mow 

meadow 

nettle 

nail 

to  thrash 

sand 

bramble 

saw 

to  winnow 

day 

briar 

loom 

to  live 

loam 

thorn 

oats 

to  bake 

dung 

fern 

wheat 

to  brew 

furrow 

dike 

barley 

to  watch 

ridge 

ditch 

straw 

to  wed 

wood 

stile 

chaff 

to  spin 

water 

harrow 

honey 

to  weave 

well 

scythe 

wax 

to  sew 

From  the  Norman-French  and  the  early  French  romances 
and  songs  were  naturally  derived  a  multitude  of  words  such 
as  are  used  by  the  wealthy  and  governing  classes,  relating  to 
government,  law,  war,  hunting,  dress,  furniture,  and  amuse- 
ments. The  following  are  a  few  of  the  words  introduced 
before  A.D.   1300 : 


amour 

conquer 

homage 

palfrey 

armor 

countess 

honor 

park 

arson 

court 

jest 

parlor 

ball 

crown 

jewel 

parliament 

banner 

dame 

judgment 

pavilion 

baron 

dress 

jugglery 

peerage 

batde 

duke 

lance 

prison 

castle 

empire 

madam 

ransom 

chamberlain 

enemy 

mantle 

renown 

champion 

ermine 

marshal 

rent 

chancellor 

falcon 

messenger 

sable 

charter 

galley 

miniver 

scarlet 

chess 

gentleman 

noble 

tower 

chivalry 

governor 

palace 

venison 

The  Sources  of  English.  29 

While  the  difference  here  exhibited  is  very  general,  we 
need  not  expect  anything  in  language  to  be  carried  out  con- 
sistently. Knighthood,  the  very  crown  and  blossom  of  Nor- 
man Chivalry,  is  Saxon,  while  the _/?«// with  which  the  rustic 
thrashed  his  barley,  was  French-Latin. 

It  has  often  been  pointed  out  that,  while  the  names  of  the 
domestic  animals,  ox,  cow,  calf,  sheep,  swine,  are  Saxon,  their 
flesh,  as  an  article  of  food,  bears  the  French  names,  beef, 
veal,  mutton,  and  pork,  with  the  apparent  implication  that  the 
Saxons  merely  raised  their  flocks  and  herds  for  others  to  eat. 
While  that  may  be  true  in  part,  I  do  not  think  it  the  imme- 
diate or  the  principal  reason.  No  doubt  the  Normans 
called  the  animals,  whether  alive  or  dead,  by  French  names, 
and  were  most  immediately  interested  in  them  when  brought 
to  the  table,  but  what  did  the  Saxons  call  them  in  that 
state?  If  they  had  any  special  names,  they  were  probably 
oxna-flcBsc,  nedt-flcEsc,  cealfficesc,  sceop-flcesc,  swin-flcesc,  in 
analogy  with  modern  German ;  but  the  men  who  knit 
together  the  bones  and  sinews  of  the  present  English  gener- 
ally left  out  long  Saxon  compounds,  not  because  they  were 
Saxon,  but  because  they  were  clumsy.  Or  if  the  Saxons 
had  no  distinctive  terms  for  the  flesh  of  the  animals,  the 
greater  was  the  necessity  for  preserving  the  French  names 
and  restricting  their  meaning.  We  have  here,  as  in  so  many 
instances,  words  of  similar  signification,  but  from  different 
sources,  preserved  and  assigned  different  duties. 

Did  space  permit,  the  condition  of  the  two  peoples  might 
be  outlined  by  naming  their  domestic  surroundings.  The 
Norman  baron  dwelt  in  a  castle, 

"  Hemmed  in  by  battlement  a.nd  fosse. 
And  many  a  darksome  tower," 

with  its  barbican  and  portcullis,  its  esplanade,  court,  chapel, 
stables,  and  offices.  Its  central  strength  was  the  donjon  keep 
or  dungeon,  in  which  were  the  cellar  and  pantry,  the  parlors, 
chambers,  and  closets.  The  beds  were  surrounded  with  cur- 
tains, and  the  walls  hung  with  tapestries.  There  the  baron 
and  his  guests  sat  on  chairs  and  dined  at  a  table. 


2,0  The  English  Language. 

The  Saxon  churl  had  still  his  house  and  home,  hearth-stone, 
and  roof-tree  ;  but  they  were  unpretentious.  The  poor  man's 
dwelling  had  but  two  apartments,  the  Scotch  but  and  ben — 
by-out  and  by-in.  It  had  neither  parlor  nor  chamber,  cellar 
nor  garret,  closet  nor  recess,  partition  nor  ceiling.  It  had  not 
even  a  chimney  ;  its  roof  was  of  thatch,  and  its  windows  were 
without  glass — mere  eyes,  or  openings  for  the  wind.  The 
householder  might  learn  from  the  Norsemen  to  put  up  a  loft 
under  the  roof,  to  be  reached  by  a  ladder.  He  had  neither 
chair  nor  table,  but  sat  on  a  bench,  a  stool,  or  a  settle,  and  ate 
his  meat  from  a  board.  Outside  might  be  a  wort-yard  where 
potherbs  grew — the  parent  of  the  modern  orchard, — and  near 
by  were  the  barn,  the  byre,  and  the  sty. 

As  Latin  was  especially  employed  for  the  graver  purposes 
of  religion,  philosophy,  and  diplomacy,  the  words  taken 
directly  from  it,  and  not  passed  through  a  French  filter, 
would  naturally  have  a  character  of  dignity  all  their  own. 
Words  like  abstract,  belligerent,  conscience,  desolate,  eternal, 
formula,  genius,  hereditary,  inviolate,  jurist,  lunar,  fnillennium, 
nominalist,  omniscient,  perpetual,  will  sufficiently  illustrate 
the  character  I  refer  to.  It  is  observed,  too,  that  when  we 
have  words  from  other  sources  for  a  number  of  individuals, 
we  often  have  a  Latin  word  that  includes  them  all.  Father, 
mother,  brother,  sister,  son,  daughter,  husband,  wife,  child,  are 
English,  hwt  fainily  is  Latin.  The  distinctive  name  of  every 
well-known  living  thing,  or  weed  of  field  or  forest,  has  an 
English  name,  but  creature,  animal,  beast,  plant,  and  herb 
are  Latin.  So  we  run,  walk,  leap,  hop,  creep,  swim,  ride, 
sail,  turn,  wheel  and  reel  and  totter  and  fall  in  plain  Eng- 
lish ;  but  every  motion  is  Latin, 

From  a  great  variety  of  other  sources  we  have  acquired  a 
few  words,  sometimes  in  very  roundabout  ways  ;  thus  the 
name  of  the  muscadine  grape  of  the  South  is  traced  back 
through  French,  Italian,  Latin,  and  Persian  to  Sanskrit. 
These  are  relatively  trifles,  but  it  remains  to  speak  of 
another  source  of  English,  as  important  as  any  yet  men- 
tioned, and  that  is  Greek.  As  the  New  Testament  was 
written  in  Greek,  a  few  words,  such  as  alms,  baptize,  cate- 


The  Sources  of  English.  3! 

chism,  Christ,  heretic,  hermit,  have  followed  the  Gospel 
wherever  preached.  But  with  these  scanty  exceptions, 
Greek  was  almost  unknown  throughout  the  Middle  Ages, 
outside  of  the  ever-shrinking  Byzantine  empire.  Learning 
had  forsaken  its  ancient  seats,  and  when  Pope  Paul,  in  the 
eighth  century,  sent  Pepin  a  present  of  what  books  could 
be  found  in  Italy,  the  collection  consisted  of  a  Latin  gram- 
mar, a  hymn-book,  and  the  forged  works  attributed  to 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite.  But  while  all  real  learning  was 
banished  from  the  West,  the  successors  of  Mahomet,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Jews  and  Nestorians,  were  eagerly 
acquiring  it  in  the  East.  While  a  French  priest  was  cir- 
culating a  letter  purporting  to  have  been  addressed  to 
mankind  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  brought  down  by  the 
archangel  Michael,  Al  Maimun  at  Bagdad  was  trans- 
lating Euclid,  measuring  a  degree  on  the  meridian,  and 
determining  the  obliquity  of  the  ecliptic.  The  Arabs 
found  useful  and  congenial  employment  in  collecting  and 
translating  the  writings  of  the  best  ages  of  Greek  literature ; 
and  it  was  through  the  schools  of  Seville,  Cordova,  and 
Granada  that  these  works  found  their  first  entrance  into 
western  Europe.  From  Spain  the  revived  learning  spread 
to  the  free  cities  of  Italy,  and  from  them  was  slowly  dis- 
seminated through  Europe.  Greek  was  first  introduced  into 
the  University  of  Oxford  in  1 500,  eight  years  after  the 
discovery  of  America  ;  and  it  was  still  forty  years  later  when 
the  first  professorship  was  established  at  Cambridge.  But 
neither  those  early  teachers  nor  the  aficient  Athenians  could 
have  imagined  the  wide  application  to  which  the  Greek 
language  was  destined  in  naming  the  objects  and  operations 
of  modern  thought.  They  could  not  have  foreseen  the 
searching  analysis  that  was  to  be  applied  to  every  substance 
and  movement  in  nature,  to  every  tissue  and  function 
disclosed  by  organic  life,  every  process  and  product  of  art, 
every  operation  and  aberration  of  the  human  mind.  Pie 
who  finds  a  new  thing  has  a  right  to  give  it  a  new  name; 
and  the  consumption  of  Greek  in  giving  names  to  things 
remote  from  the  daily  thoughts  of  men  is  enormous.     The 


32  The  English  Language. 

words  of  Greek  origin,  including  all  those  belonging  to  special 
subjects,  probably  outnumber  those  from  any  other  source, 
and  in  English  exceed  those  from  all  other  sources.  The 
exact  number  can  only  be  approximated  ;  but  the  following 
is  such  approximation  : 

Descriptive  of  the  animal  kingdom 72,000 

Vegetable  kingdom 13,000 

Sciences  connected  with  medicine 18,000 

All  other  subjects,  perhaps 10,000 

Total 1 13,000 

The  practice  of  forming  scientific  terms  from  Greek  is,  no 
doubt,  in  part  a  matter  of  habit  and  fashion,  but,  aside  from 
these  frivolous  reasons,  no  other  source  would  serve  so  well. 
It  is  not  because  Greek  is  a  learned  tongue,  or  that  the 
Greeks  had  the  words  we  now  use.  They  neither  had  the 
words  nor  any  use  for  them.  We  make  them  to  order,  just 
as  we  might  make  such  a  word  as  switch-tender-stand,  which 
is  an  excellent  example  of  the  kind  of  words  we  should  make 
of  native  material — long,  inelegant,  and  cumbersome.  Greek 
has  the  advantage  of  combining  with  extraordinary  facility 
into  pronounceable  compounds.  Its  consonants  and  vowels 
are  not  gathered  into  solid,  insoluble  lumps,  but  very  evenly 
distributed,  and  upon  a  page  are  almost  equal  in  number. 
This,  I  think,  is  the  foundation  of  its  excellence.  The 
languages  of  northern  Europe  abound  in  undistributed  con- 
sonants,— strz,  ntzsch,  Idschm,  krzyz.  Hence,  in  combining 
several  words  into  a  new  compound,  each  part  is  apt  to  begin 
and  end  with  consonants,  and  the  result  is  such  a  word  as 
Griindungsschwindeln.  Compared  with  such  an  unwieldy 
leviathan  the  longest  term  in  Greek  is  a  plaything.  Skoro- 
dopandokeutriartopolis  ripples  along  as  pleasantly  as  a  sum- 
mer brook  on  a  pebbly  bed  ;  and  the  farrago  of  Aristophanes, 
that  contains  169  letters,  moves  so  trippingly  on  the  tongue 
that  one  might  dance  to  it.  We  may  illustrate  this  modern 
use  of  Greek  by  the  familiar  word  geography,  from  ge,  earth, 
and  graph,  write  ;  literally  earth-writing.     We  see  at  once 


The  Sources  of  English.  33 

that  the  word  we  actually  use  is  much  neater  than  its  Saxon 
equivalent.  It  is  next  observed  that  between  the  parts  an  o 
is  inserted,  that  belongs  to  neither.  The  privilege  of  inserting 
at  pleasure  a  connecting  vowel  facilitates  greatly  the  making 
of  new  compounds.  In  this  way  we  form  just  as  easily 
geology,  geodesy,  geognosy,  geogeny,  geometry,  geonomy,  geo- 
phagy,  and  about  140  others,  easily  distinguished,  easily 
pronounced,  and  to  the  learned  of  all  nations  disclosing 
their  meaning  at  sight.  It  is  even  an  advantage  that  their 
structure  is  seen  only  by  the  learned.  They  are  thus  kept 
to  the  form  and  signification  intended,  and  are  not  corrupted, 
frittered  away,  and  applied  to  whatever  might  happen. 
Dinotheriuin  is  literally  terrible  beast ;  but  the  English 
equivalent  could  not  possibly  be  kept  as  the  name  of  a 
particular  animal. 

There  are  patriotic  persons  who  lament  the  loss  of  every 
Saxon  word,  and  deem  it  matter  of  deep  regret  that  our 
language  ever  admitted  foreign  elements.  I  do  not,  to  any 
great  extent,  share  their  grief.  With  words  as  with  men, 
present  usefulness  and  good  qualities  far  outweigh  ancestral 
pedigree.  Sugar  is  not  less  sweet,  nor  is  its  name  harsher 
to  tongue  or  ear,  because  it  is  a  stranger  from  Arabia.  We 
cannot,  indeed,  be  quite  sure  how  a  language  would  sound 
that  we  never  actually  heard ;  but,  so  far  as  I  can  judge 
from  its  appearance,  Saxon  seems  to  have  been  a  cumbrous 
affair.  While  in  no  case  more  facile  than  modern  English, 
it  was  often  far  more  unwieldy.  Take  a  few  examples  of 
the  more  unmanageable  words  : 

daeghwamlican  daily 

leorning-cnihtas  pupils,  scholars 

msegen-thrymnesse  glory 

modstatholnesse  fortitude 

onbescedwian  oversee 

unanbindendlicum  inseparable 

I  do  not  question  but  that  words  of  any  desired  power 
might  be  constructed  in  this  way,  if  only  made  sufficiently 
3 


34  "^^^  English  Language. 

long  and  unpronounceable.  Russian  and  German  show 
what  can  be  accomplished  with  native  material.  Here  are 
a  single  Russian  word  and  half  a  dozen  German : 

Bolotnoperemezhdayushchagosya 

Erschiitterungssphare 

Geschwindigkeitsmesser 

halbkreisformiges 

Grubenschienenbahnwarter 

Kriegsverpflichtungsamt 

Verwandtschaftsnamen 


The  German  comes  as  near  as  possible  to  making  his  word 
a  sentence  and  his  sentence  a  metaphysical  disquisition. 
The  German  language  is  unquestionably  an  instrument  of 
great  power ;  but  its  power  is  a  little  like  that  of  the  bow  of 
Ulysses,  which  was  chiefly  famed  for  the  difficulty  of  using 
it,  and  was  not  half  so  effective  as  a  Winchester  rifle.  Eng- 
lish has  been  saved  from  such  productions  as  those  just 
exhibited,  and  been  made  what  it  is  by  a  thousand  years  of 
living  contact  with  other  peoples  and  tongues. 

If  it  be  said  that  Saxon  words  might  have  been  simplified 
by  time,  as  many  of  their  modern  representatives  really  are, 
I  answer  that  such  a  change  was  no  doubt  possible,  but  would 
it  have  taken  place  without  the  constant  presence  and  pres- 
sure of  foreign  models?  No  such  simplification  has  taken 
place  in  Russian  or  German.  And  further  our  words  of 
Saxon  origin  are  easy  because  they  are  short,  and  we  have 
given  up  making  them  into  long  combinations.  Looking 
then  merely  to  the  past  and  present  qualities  of  the  English 
language,  I  cannot  but  regard  the  Norman  conquest  as  a 
great  blessing. 

The  English  language  has  profited  by  its  multifarious 
acquisitions  because  it  has  transformed  them  all  after  its  own 
image.  All  but  a  few  of  the  simplest  words  have  been  recast, 
and  are  no  longer  Saxon,  Norse,  Welsh,  French,  Latin,  or 
Greek,  but  English.  Every  language  has  a  character  of  its 
own — a   scale   of   sounds,  an    accentuation,  a  rhythm    and 


The  Sources  of  English. 


35 


cadence,  a  set  of  beginnings  and  endings,  and  a  whole 
mechanism  of  speech  peculiar  to  itself — so  that  a  good  ear 
may  distinguish  one  language  from  another  without  knowing 
a  word  of  them.  If  our  words  had  been  preserved  in  their 
native  forms,  we  should  have  an  unspeakable  piebald  jargon 
instead  of  the  harmonious  unity  seen  in  the  Bible  and  the 
works  of  Lord  Macaulay.  It  is  well  that  our  fathers  followed 
the  example  of  the  diligent  bees,  that  gather  the  juices  of 
every  flower  and  combine  them  into  a  homogeneous  whole, 
sweet,  nutritious,  and  wholesome.  Our  words  are  often  so 
transformed  that  their  own  mothers  would  not  know  them  ; 
and  the  average  English  speaker  can  no  more  distinguish 
them  according  to  origin  than  he  can  the  children  of  the 
Saxon  and  the  Norman.  Here  are  60  words  from  24  different 
sources,  and  none  but  the  scholar  would  know  that  they  are 
not  all  equally  native-born : 


barrel 

chest 

frolic 

muslin 

skunk 

basket 

cider 

giant 

myrtle 

slag 

bishop 

clinker 

ginger 

paper 

spigot 

block 

cradle 

girl 

peach 

squirrel 

blue 

crease 

gum 

pepper 

swindle 

bonnet 

dirt 

hemp 

queer 

talk 

boy 

dish 

hurricane 

rose 

tea 

brindled 

dog 

husband 

rum 

trowel 

candle 

dog-cheap 

jacket 

sable 

vampire 

carpenter 

elm 

kale 

sabre 

viper 

cedar 

fellow 

lamp 

sack 

vow 

cheese 

fog 

measles 

silk 

whiskey 

At  present  the  disposition  is  to  maintain  foreign  words 
with  all  their  foreign  peculiarities  unimpaired,  as  if  it  were 
more  important  to  preserve  their  original  nationality  than  to 
make  them  good  citizens.  The  only  reason  of  any  perceptible 
force  is  the  desirability  of  preserving  the  pedigrees  of  words ; 
but  that  is  a  matter  that  interests  only  the  small  number 
who  have  no  need  of  such  aid.  We  can  scarcely  avoid 
believing  that  the  outlandish  words  are  sprinkled  in,  and 
their   unfamiliar    sounds   imitated   to    display   the    elegant 


36  The  English  Language. 

acquirements  of  the  writer  or  speaker.  Far  the  greater 
number  are  French,  and  so  have  the  least  possible  harmony 
with  English.  Why  should  such  expressions  as  denouements 
couvre-pied,  coup  d'oeil,  be  forced  upon  the  English  reader  or 
hearer?  They  are  unnecessary,  and  jar  upon  a  sensitive  ear 
like  discords  in  music.  They  are  the  stock-in-trade  of  inferior 
writers,  and  especially  female  novelists.  The  writer  of  *'  Robert 
Elsmere  "  might  have  taught  all  she  had  to  teach  and  more, 
without  introducing  similar  uncouth  expressions  180  times  in 
one  small  volume. 

Several  estimates  have  been  made  of  the  relative  number 
of  modern  English  words  derived  from  different  sources.  In 
the  last  century  George  Hickes  estimated  on  the  narrow  basis 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  that  nine  tenths  of  our  words  were  still 
Saxon.  Widely  different  was  the  conclusion  of  Sharon 
Turner,  that  the  Norman  were  to  the  Saxon  as  four  to  six. 
Dean  Trench  computes  that  60  per  cent,  are  Saxon,  30  per 
cent.  Latin,  including  those  received  through  a  French  chan- 
nel, 5  per  cent.  Greek,  and  5  scattering.  M.  Thommerel,  by 
counting  every  word  in  the  dictionaries  of  Robertson  and 
Webster,  obtained  the  result  that  of  a  sum  total  of  43,566 
words,  29,853  were  of  Greek  or  Latin  origin,  13,230  Teutonic, 
and  483  from  all  other  sources.  These  discordant  computa- 
tions seem  to  overlook  the  fact  that  many  words  that  may  be 
conveniently  called  hybrids  cannot  properly  be  charged  to 
any  particular  source.  They  are  of  three  classes.  The  first 
and  largest  consists  of  compound  words  X^o.  penman, peacock , 
pyroligneous,  aldehyde,  the  parts  of  which  are  taken  from  dif- 
ferent languages ;  the  words  of  the  second  are  derived  from 
proper  names,  as  Cartesian,  Flemish,  dahlia  ;  and  a  few  are 
of  uncertain  origin. 

Skeat's  Etymological  Dictionary  contains  a  little  over 
13,000  words,  as  it  excludes  generally  obsolete  and  local 
words,  derivative  forms,  and  the  technical  terms  of  the  more 
unfamiliar  sciences.  A  classification  of  its  contents,  omitting 
a  few  duplicate  forms,  will  give  a  very  fair  idea  of  the  sources 
of  the  words  employed  in  general  literature  and  conversation. 
They  are : 


The  Sources  of  English.  37 

Anglo-Saxon  and  English 2,863 

Low  German 116 

Dutch  of  the  Low  Countries 187 

Scandinavian 688 

High  German,  of  all  periods 221 

Teutonic,  indeterminate 90 

Celtic  languages 351 

Latin 2,094 

Latin  through  French 3,545 

Latin  through  other  channels 341 

French,  not  traceable  farther 129 

Proven9al  {charade) i 

Italian 43 

Spanish 25 

Portuguese  {cocoa,  dodo,  emu,  yam) 4 

Greek,  adopted  directly  and  indirectly i>388 

Slavonic  languages 14 

Lithuanian  {talk) 1 

Hungarian  {hussar,  sabre,  shako,  tokay) 4 

Turkish 14 

Persian   77 

Sanskrit 39 

Hebrew 72 

Syriac 8 

Chaldee  {raca,  talmud,  targum) 3 

Arabic 107 

Other  Asiatic  languages 53 

Oceanean 5 

African  languages 24 

American  languages 46 

Hybrid  words 419 

Unknown 21 

Total 12,993 

But  a  great  part  of  these  words  are  rarely  met  with,  being 
either  obsolete  or  confined  to  some  special  art  or  science. 
The  vocabulary  of  almost  any  single  author  would  show  a 
much  larger  native  element. 

The  proportion    of    words    from    each   of    the  principal 


38  The  English  Language. 

sources  varies  greatly,  according  to  the  subject  and  the 
mental  habit  and  associations  of  each  speaker.  Country 
folk  talk  in  Saxon  of  their  farms,  crops,  and  families ;  ladies 
of  "  society  "  prefer  a  liberal  seasoning  of  real  or  supposed 
French  ;  literary  people  and  those  who  aim  at  being  sarcas- 
tic use  a  great  many  words  derived  from  Latin  ;  and  scientific 
specialists  abound  in  Greek. 

Several  methods  have  been  proposed  for  analyzing  the 
styles  of  different  writers,  but  chiefly  with  a  view  to  showing 
the  extent  of  the  native  element,  without  further  distin- 
guishing the  others.  One  method  has  been  to  select  a  pas- 
sage, arrange  the  several  words  as  in  a  dictionary,  and  count 
each  one  once.  It  is  objected  to  this  plan  that  a  word  that 
occurs  only  once,  and  so  has  little  effect  on  the  general 
style,  counts  for  as  much  as  one  repeated  a  hundred  times. 
It  has  therefore  been  proposed  as  a  second  method  to  count 
each  word  as  it  stands  on  the  page,  making  *'  the  "  perhaps 
equal  30,  and  '^  Jlocculent,"  i.  The  results  of  these  two  meth- 
ods would  be  very  different.  But  the  words  of  most  fre- 
quent occurrence  are  little  ones  that  by  themselves  suggest 
no  idea ;  and  these  are  always  native  English  and  are  always 
present,  whatever  the  style  may  be.  They  are  a  constant 
element,  and,  if  counted,  disguise  the  actual  differences  of 
style.  There  is  therefore  a  third  resource,  to  count  only 
the  significant  words — those  that  represent  things,  actions, 
and  qualities,  including  those  secondary  qualities  that  de- 
scribe actions  and  other  qualities,  as  rapidly,  slightly.  To 
make  this  clearer  let  us  take  a  sentence  and  italicize  the 
significant  words : 

"  Many  cabals  were  formed,  loud  complaints  were  uttered,  and 
desperate  resolutions  taken  ;  but  before  they  proceeded  to  extremi- 
ties they  appointed  some  of  their  number  to  examine  the  powers  in 
consequence  of   which  the  cardinal  exercised  acts  of   such  high 

authority." 

Robertson  :  "  Charles  V." 

Here  are  40  words,  of  which  just  one  half  are  insignifi- 
cant and  such  as  have  to  be  used  by  every  one.     Of  the 


The  Sources  of  English.  39 

other  20  cabal  h  Hebrew;  loud,  high,  uttered,  and  taken 
are  native  English,  and  the  remainder  derived  from  Latin, 
either  directly  or  through  a  French  medium.  According  to 
the  second  method  of  computation  the  native  words  are 
60  per  cent. ;  by  the  third  they  are  20.  The  last  method 
is  the  one  adopted  in  the  following  table,  which  is  calcu- 
lated on  a  basis  of  200  significant  words  divided  into 
two  classes,  native  and  foreign.  Proper  names  are  passed 
by  altogether.  The  numbers  give  the  percentage  of  native 
words. 

Kentish  Sermon a.d.,  1250,  92  '' 

Havelock  the  Dane "  i3oo>  87 

Sir  John  Mandeville "  1356,  69 

Chaucer,  Prologue,  Cant.  Tales "  i39o»  5^ 

Wycliffe  (Luke  xx.) "  1389,  70 

Tyndale  (Luke  xx.) "  1526,  63 

Authorized  Version  (Luke  xx.) "  1610,  64 

Ghost's  Story  in  Hamlet "  1600,  49 

Bacon,  Essay  29 "  16 12,  30 

Dryden  (prose) "  1683,  29 

Dr.  Johnson "  1748,  24 

Gibbon "  1776,  18 

Hawthorne "  1853,  43 

Macaulay  (History) "  1848,  33 

Dasent's  Translation  of  the  Gisli  Saga. .  "  1846,  81 

The  native  English  element  underwent  a  pretty  steady 
decline  from  the  age  of  Edward  the  Confessor  to  the  close 
of  the  last  century,  reaching  the  lowest  point  in  the  ponder- 
ous sentences  of  Gibbon,  in  some  of  which  every  significant 
word  is  Latin  : 

"  From  such  laudable  arts  did  the  valor  of  the  Imperial  troops 
receive  a  degree  of  firmness  and  docility  unattainable  by  the  impetu- 
ous and  irregular  passions  of  barbarians." 

In  the  present  century  there  is  a  reaction  against  this 
.^:olemn,  labored  style  and  in  favor  of  a  freer  use  of  native 
English.     The  result  has  been  a  style  more  crisp,  fresh,  and 


40  The  English  Language. 

direct.  The  writer  who,  so  far  as  I  know,  has  carried  this 
use  of  English  furthest  is  Dr.  Dasent,  distinguished  by  his 
illustrations  of  Icelandic  literature.  As  a  contrast  to  the 
style  of  Gibbon  I  present  a  passage  from  his  translation  of 
Njal's  Saga,  introducing  a  famous  chief  and  warrior — Gunnar 
of  Lithend  : 

"  He  was  a  tall  man  in  growth,  and  a  strong  man — ^best  skilled 
in  arms  of  all  men.  He  could  cut  or  thrust  or  shoot  if  he  chose 
as  well  with  his  left  as  with  his  right  hand,  and  he  smote  so 
swiftly  with  his  sword,  that  three  seemed  to  flash  through  the  air 
at  once.  He  was  the  best  shot  with  the  bow  of  all  men,  and  never 
missed  his  mark.  He  could  leap  more  than  his  own  height  with 
all  his  war-gear,  and  as  far  backwards  as  forwards.  He  could 
swim  like  a  seal,  and  there  was  no  game  in  which  it  was  any  good 
for  any  one  to  strive  with  him  ;  and  so  it  has  been  said  that  no 
man  was  his  match.  He  was  handsome  of  feature^  and  fair 
skinned.  His  nose  was  straight,  and  a  little  turned  up  at  the 
end.  He  was  blue-eyed  and  bright-eyed,  and  ruddy-cheeked. 
His  hair  thick,  and  of  good  hue,  and  hanging  down  in  comely 
curls.  The  most  courteous  of  men  was  he,  of  sturdy  frame  and 
strong  will,  bountiful  and  gentle^  a  fast  friend,  but  hard  to  please 
when  making  them." 

The  simpler  the  ideas  are,  and  the  nearer  to  every-day  life, 
the  greater  the  share  of  English  words  that  may  be  used. 

Sentences  made  up  wholly  of  native  words  are  common 
enough  in  conversation,  but  are  rare  in  books,  except  in  the 
Bible.     See  as  examples  Job  xxxi.,  21,  22  ;  John  i.,  1-4. 

Sentences  containing  no  native  English  words  are  still 
rarer.     Here  is  an  attempt  at  constructing  one  : 

"  Injudiciously  profuse  eleemosynary  aid,  defeating  benevolent 
intentions,  frequently  stimulates  voluntary  pauperism." 

The  question  how  large  a  part  of  their  native  tongue  most 
people  know  is  answered  by  Professor  Max  Miiller  in  his 
usual  clear  and  decisive  manner : 

"  A  well  educated  person  in  England,  who  has  been  at  a  public 
school  and  at  the  university,  who  reads  his  Shakespeare,  the 


The  Sources  of  English.  41 

Times,  and  all  the  books  of  Mudie's  Library,  seldom  uses  more 
than  about  3,000  or  4,000  words  in  actual  conversation.  Accu- 
rate thinkers  and  close  reasoners,  who  avoid  vague  and  general 
expressions,  and  wait  till  they  find  the  word  that  exactly  fits  their 
meaning,  employ  a  larger  stock  ;  and  eloquent  speakers  may  rise 
to  a  command  of  10,000.  The  Hebrew  Testament  says  all  it  has 
to  say  with  5,642  words ;  Milton's  works  are  built  up  with  8,000 ; 
and  Shakespeare,  who  probably  displayed  a  greater  variety  of 
expression  than  any  writer  in  any  language,  produced  all  his 
plays  with  about  15,000  words." 

"  Lectures  on  Language,"  lee.  vii. 

This  is  not  precisely  saying  how  many  words  we  know,  but 
as  eloquent  speakers  may  only  rise  to  the  command  of  10,000, 
it  may  be  fairly  presumed  that  common  folk  could  not  use  so 
many  if  they  would.  The  qualifications  of  his  lowest  class 
are  so  high,  that  most  cultured  Americans  would  certainly  be 
limited  to  not  more  than  4,000  words.  Very  few  of  us  have 
had  the  advantages  enumerated.  But  approaching  the  ques- 
tion from  another  side,  we  find  Webster's  Dictionary — 
edition  of  1890 — professing  to  contain  over  1 1 8,000  words. 
Joining  these  two  points,  we  should  reach  the  remarkable 
conclusion  that  a  moderately  educated  American  is  ac- 
quainted with  less  than  -^  of  his  mother  tongue,  which  is 
manifestly  and  widely  erroneous.  The  term  word  is  not 
used  in  the  same  sense  by  both  authors.  The  Oxford  pro- 
fessor is  doubtless  a  better  guide  in  this  than  the  American 
lexicographer.  The  enormous  number  of  words  stated  in 
the  Dictionary  gives  a  false  impression.  Some  of  these 
words  are  completely  obsolete,  others  are  still  entirely  foreign 
expressions,  others  again  are  restricted  to  particular  arts 
or  sciences,  and  form  no  part  of  the  language  of  ordinary  life 
or  literature.  Examples  of  these  words  which  might  prop- 
erly be  omitted  are :  qa  ira,  bedagat,  cachiri,  caimacan,  cous- 
cous, Davyt,  dawm,  dendrocolaptes,  doand,  couzeranite,  Ich 
dien,  ad  quod  damnum,  cegrotat,pulmonibranchiate,  angiomono- 
spermous.  Many  words  are  merely  various  spellings  of  the 
same.  Many  are  repeated  as  nouns,  adjectives,  verbs  transi- 
tive  and   verbs   intransitive.     Winter  and  water   are   each 


42  The  English  Language. 

counted  as  three  words.  The  obsolete  dogly  is  made  to  do 
duty  as  two  words,  and  the  equally  antiquated  dorr  as  seven. 
Words  are  drawn  out  in  long  array  by  means  of  suffixes  and 
combinations.  The  simple  word  delight  counts  for  i6 ;  25 
combinations  are  made  with  honey ;  and  water  is  an  element 
in  203.  Some  of  these  combinations  are  such  as  well-water, 
well-borer,  winter-apple,  winter-wheat,  which  every  one  can 
make  for  himself  ad  libitum  and  ad  infinitum.  Most  of 
these  words  may  be  very  properly  placed  in  the  Dictionary, 
but  their  reiteration  gives  an  undue  air  of  immensity  to  the 
language.  On  40  pages  taken  at  random  I  find  2,741  words, 
of  which  357  may  be  reckoned  as  obsolete,  foreign,  or  tech- 
nical expressions.  Of  the  remainder  1,635  are  repetitions, 
derivatives,  or  compounds,  that  retain  the  primitive  significa- 
tion, leaving  749  really  distinct  words.  Then  taking  my  own 
knowledge,  as  the  only  measure  of  the  general  intelligence 
that  can  be  applied,  I  find  209  with  which  I  am  not  ac- 
quainted, which  is  less  than  one  third  (^)  of  the  primary 
words,  or  one  eleventh  (yy)>  including  the  derivatives  and 
compounds.  The  outcome  of  all  which  is  that  instead  of 
knowing  but  an  insignificant  fraction  of  our  language,  we 
are  more  or  less  familiar  with  over  five  sixths  (f)  of  the  words 
and  forms  of  words  available  for  general  literary  purposes 
and  daily  use ;  also  that  with  the  above  limitations  Webster's 
great  Dictionary  probably  does  not  contain  more  than  30,000 
independent  words. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  PROVINCE  OF  GRAMMAR. 

English  grammar  has  long  been  defined  as  the  art  of 
speaking  and  writing  the  English  language  correctly.  One 
of  the  text-books  used  in  the  public  schools  of  this  city  calls 
it  more  ambitiously,  "  the  science  which  teaches  how  to  speak 
and  write  the  English  language  correctly."  The  claim  is  a 
large  one,  and  not  to  be  conceded  without  inquiry.  "  Our 
language,"  says  Professor  Whitney,  *'  like  every  other,  is 
made  up  of  words."  Of  these,  Webster's  Dictionary,  edi- 
tion of  1890,  professes  to  contain  "an  aggregate  of  upward 
of  118,000."  One  who  knows  all  these  thoroughly,  or  even 
20,000  of  the  most  necessary,  and  how  to  use  them,  possesses 
the  art  of  speaking  and  writing  the  English  language  cor- 
rectly. The  art  should  certainly  include  a  knowledge  of  the 
words  themselves.  Let  us  see :  we  may  select  almost  any 
word  and  inquire  what  the  grammatical  text-books  have  to 
tell  us  about  it.  We  may  take  the  word  theatfe,  and  inquire 
its  origin  and  history,  its  meaning,  its  form — theatre  or  the- 
ater,— its  pronunciation — theatre  or  thedtre.  As  a  mere  word, 
this  is  nearly  all  that  we  care  to  know  about  it.  To  all 
these  questions,  a  good  dictionary  will  furnish  answers;  a 
grammar  will  give  none.  From  the  grammatical  text-books 
we  may  infer  one  point  as  probable — that  when  we  speak 
of  more  than  one  such  establishment  we  should  add  an  s. 
But  that  simple  fact  is  known  about  as  well  by  the  street 
Arab  as  by  the  graduate  of  the  highest  schools.  In  justice, 
however,  it  must  be  conceded  that  when  such  a  distinction 
is  uniform,  or  nearly  so,  a  considerable  labor  of  search  is 
saved  by  assuming  it  to  hold  good,  and  taking  the  chances. 

43 


44  The  English  Language. 

Unfortunately  the  assumption  would  fail  us  just  where  it  is 
most  needed — in  unfamiliar  words,  as  anas,  amaryllis,  incubus, 
polyergus.  No  grammar  will  help  us  to  distinguish  the  luin- 
bar  region  from  the  lumber  region,  or  discriminate  between 
the  expressions,  to  differ  from  and  to  differ  with,  so  that  in 
nearly  all  cases  of  difficulty  we  must  have  recourse  to  the 
dictionary  and  not  to  the  grammar. 

If  lion  were  the  name  of  the  male  of  a  certain  species  of 
animal,  and  lioness  were  the  female,  and  the  same  held  good 
universally,  it  would  be  quite  convenient,  as  on  learning  one 
form  of  the  word  we  could  readily  infer  the  other.  But  this 
relation  is  of  so  rare  occurrence,  that  a  knowledge  of  it  is  of 
no  practical  value.  Again,  in  Arabic  for  example,  in  words 
of  more  than  one  syllable  the  last  never  has  the  accent ;  if 
the  next  to  the  last  ends  in  a  consonant  or  written  long 
vowel,  it  is  accented ;  otherwise,  the  second  from  the  last. 
Here  the  whole  system  of  accentuation  for  the  language  may 
be  expressed  in  a  single  sentence.  Icelandic  is  still  simpler 
in  that  respect,  for  there  the  first  syllable  is  always  accented, 
be  the  word  long  or  short.  But  no  such  absolute  rules 
obtain  in  English,  where  the  accent  of  each  word  must  be 
learned  by  itself.  In  short,  ours  is  a  language  of  exceptions 
and  irregularities,  in  which  the  dictionary  counts  for  every- 
thing, the  grammar,  almost  nothing.  But  if,  from  the  irreg- 
ularities of  our  language,  grammatical  rules  are  of  narrower 
scope  than  in  some  others,  we  shall  find  that  we  have  less 
use  for  them.  It  has  been  hinted  above  that  plural  names — 
names  of  more  than  one — have  generally  an  s  added  to  dis- 
tinguish them.  There  might  well  be  other  additions  or 
changes  corresponding  to  modifications  in  the  meaning  of 
words.  In  point  of  fact  there  are  a  few  such  in  English. 
The  orderly  presentation  of  these  changes  in  names  gram- 
marians call  declension  ;  in  words  expressing  action  of  any 
kind,  it  is  called  conjugation  ;  and  these  comprise  the  larger 
part  of  grammar.  Professor  Max  Miiller  says  rather  abso- 
lutely, "  What  is  grammar  after  all  but  declension  and  con- 
jugation ?  "  It  is  unquestionably  true  that  they  constitute 
the  greatest  part  of  all  that  is  of  immediate  practical  value. 


The  Province  of  Grammar.  45 

But  some  languages  may  be  richer  in  varying  forms  and 
require  more  declension  and  conjugation  than  others.  In 
English  a  name,  or  noun,  as  it  is  called,  may  assume  four 
forms,  thus : 

man  men 

man's  men's 

None  present  a  fuller  declension  than  this,  and  few  are  so 
complete.  If  boy  had  been  selected  instead  of  man,  while  by 
orthographic  expedients  four  forms  might  have  been  pre- 
sented to  the  eye — boy,  boys,  boys,  and  boys  ,  to  the  ear  there 
would  have  been  but  two.  So  in  other  languages  some  of 
what  are  theoretically  different  forms  are  no  longer  dis- 
tinguishable ;  but,  counting  the  full  number,  a  Latin  noun 
has  12  variations,  a  Greek  15,  a  Hebrew  26,  while  a  Hunga- 
rian or  Magyar,  with  its  various  affixes,  admits  of  1,154  com- 
binations. Or,  if  we  take  such  a  qualifying  word  as  earthen, 
or  English,  which  with  us  has  only  one  form,  its  synonym  in 
Latin  might  have  36,  and  in  Greek  45  variations.  Again  an 
English  verb  never  has  more  than  8  distinct  forms,  and  sel- 
dom more  than  half  that  number  in  actual  use.  Of  the 
entire  system,  as  write,  writ  est,  writeth,  writes,  writing, 
wrote,  wrotest,  written,  three  are  practically  obsolete ;  while 
far  the  greater  number  have  in  use  only  four  forms,  as  sail, 
sails,  sailing,  sailed.  In  contrast  with  this  scanty  stock,  the 
Spanish  verb  presents  (theoretically)  120  variants  ;  the  Latin 
444;  the  Greek  according  to  Kuehner's  Grammar,  1,138,  ac- 
cording to  Professor  Miiller  the  round  sum  of  1,300;  the 
Hebrew  246;  and  the  Arabic  over  2,100;  while  Professor 
Whitney  cites  the  Rev.  T.  Hurlbut  as  saying  that  he  had 
ascertained  by  actual  computation  that  an  Algonkin  verb 
admits  of  17,000,000  variations.  If  then  grammar  be  merely 
declension  and  conjugation,  which  is  not  far  from  the  truth, 
it  plays  comparatively  a  very  insignificant  part  in  English. 
All  the  irregularities  of  our  language  are  more  than  compen- 
sated by  the  extreme  paucity  of  its  grammatical  forms.  It 
is  almost  as  grammarless  as  Chinese,  in  which  no  written 
word  is  ever  varied  by  a  single  stroke  or  dot,  and  when 


46  The  English  Language. 

spoken  admits  of  only  a  change  of  tone.  The  weary  hours 
and  years  spent  by  our  youth  in  parsing  English  sentences 
according  to  forms  borrowed  from  Greek  and  Latin  are 
worse  than  wasted — useless  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  learn- 
ing to  speak  and  write,  and  leading  to  a  misapprehension  of 
what  our  language  is.  Professor  Whitney,  in  his  "  Essen- 
tials of  English  Grammar  "  says,  "  Nor  is  the  study  of  the 
grammar  of  one's  native  tongue  by  any  means  necessary  in 
order  to  acquire  correctness  of  speech.  Most  persons  learn 
good  English  in  the  same  way  that  they  learn  English  at  all 
— namely,  by  hearing  and  reading."  The  same  opinion  is 
probably  held  now  by  all  competent  persons  who  have  given 
the  subject  attention.  We  know,  too,  that  many  of  the 
masterpieces  of  human  literature,  in  languages  incomparably 
more  intricate  than  ours,  are  the  work  of  men  who  had  never 
heard  of  grammar  as  either  a  science  or  an  art.  All  that  is 
most  prized  in  Greek  literature  was  written  before  any  book 
on  grammar  had  been  seen  west  of  the  Euphrates.  Only 
two  peoples  of  all  the  world,  the  Hindoos  and  the  Greeks, 
originated  the  idea  of  analyzing  their  languages  and  codifying 
their  peculiarities.  The  former  had  the  priority  in  time,  and 
the  superiority  in  analytical  acuteness.  To  learn  to  write 
and  speak  correctly  was  not  the  object  of  either.  They 
could  do  that  already  ;  but  both  wished  to  preserve  unaltered 
their  oldest  and  most  revered  writings.  The  Brahmin  re- 
garded the  hymns  of  the  Veda  as  no  mere  human  composi- 
tions, but  only  seen  in  vision  and  copied  by  the  ancient 
Rishis.  To  him  the  correct  pronunciation  and  accent  of  a 
syllable  might  determine  his  salvation.  Hence  immense 
labor  was  spent  in  observing  and  noting  the  form  of  every 
word  and  the  recurrence  of  every  change.  In  the  fourth  or 
fifth  century  before  Christ,  and  long  before  the  invasion  of 
Alexander,  the  Hindoos  had  traced  all  the  words  of  the 
Sanskrit  to  1,706  roots,  and  determined  the  particles  and 
afifixes  with  which  they  were  combined,  and  all  the  outlines 
of  grammar  as  now  understood.  The  thought  of  grammar 
had  not  yet  occurred  to  the  Greek.  Plato,  in  his  philosoph- 
ical speculations  and  with  no  view  to  correctness  of  style, 


The  Province  of  Grammar.  47 

divided  words  into  nouns,  onomata,  and  verbs,  rhemata ; 
although  we  are  left  in  the  dark  as  to  what  each  class  con- 
tained. He  was  also  acquainted  with  the  distinction  between 
vowels  and  consonants.  Aristotle,  for  merely  rhetorical  pur- 
poses, added  the  classes  of  conjunctions  and  articles,  but  by 
the  latter  he  meant  pronouns  and  relatives.  This  is  as  far  as 
Greek  grammar  advanced  in  its  native  country. 

But  before  Hindoo  or  Greek  had  made  the  analysis  of  his 
language  the  nations  of  Chaldea  had  compiled  dictionaries 
and  grammars  for  the  more  practical  purpose  of  learning  a 
language  not  their  own.  The  great  kingdoms  of  which  we 
read  in  the  Bible  had  been  preceded  by  a  cultivated  people 
of  wholly  different  speech — a  people  devoted  to  science  and 
literature,  who  had  left  behind  them  considerable  writings, 
or  rather  printings.  The  speech  of  that  early  people  was  to 
those  who  came  after  what  Latin  was  to  Europe  for  so  many 
ages,  and  text-books  were  prepared  for  learning  it.  Modem 
explorers  find  fragments  of  those  ancient  grammars  among 
the  ruins  of  the  royal  libraries  of  Sargon  and  Assur-bani-pal.* 

Early  civilization  had  three  chief,  and  perhaps  independent, 
centres  of  development,  China,  Chaldea,  and  Egypt.  The 
first  two  had  but  little  influence  on  the  rest  of  the  world ; 
but  Egypt,  lying  on  the  Mediterranean,  the  great  highway 
of  nations,  was  the  mother  of  western  science,  whose  cradle 
was  rocked  by  the  Pharaohs  and  the  Ptolemies. 

In  the  new  city  of  Alexandria  men  of  all  climes,  from 
India  to  Spain,  and  from  Mount  Atlas  to  Norway,  met  and 
exchanged  the  products  and  ideas  of  their  countries.  The 
halls  of  the  great  Museum  were^  thronged  with  more  than 
10,000  students.  The  director,  Demetrius  'Phalereus,  had 
orders  to  collect  all  the  writings  of  the  world  for  its 
libraries.     The  copies  of  the  old  Greek  classics  were  found  to 

'  Sargon  I.  looms  in  the  dim  distance  like  the  figures  of  Haroun  Al-Raschid, 
Charlemagne,  and  Alfred.  Assur-bani-pal  is  celebrated  by  Arrian  and  Nicolaus 
of  Damascus  as  ' '  Sardanapalus,  King,  and  son  of  Anacyndaraxes,  who  built  two 
cities  in  one  day,  Anchialus  and  Tarsus."  He  was  really  the  son  of  Essar-had- 
don  and  grandson  of  Sennacherib  II.  (Kings  xix.,  37),  the  prototype  of  Louis 
XIV.,  and  among  other  things  a  munificent  patron  of  learning. 


48  The  English  Language. 

contain  various  readings.  Out  of  these  the  scholars  of  the 
Museum  undertook  to  publish  critical  editions.  This  neces- 
sitated a  minute  study  of  the  text.  Zenodotus,  the  first 
librarian,  about  B.C.  250,  detected  and  pointed  out  the  per- 
sonal pronouns  and  the  singular,  dual,  and  plural  numbers. 
Nearly  a  century  later  Aristarchus  discovered  the  preposi- 
tions. In  all  this  there  was  no  thought  of  developing  an 
art  to  teach  people  how  to  use  their  mother-tongue.  But 
when  it  became  the  fashion  for  the  young  Roman  gentry  to 
learn  Greek,  as  the  moderns  do  French,  a  necessity  arose  for 
systematic  analysis.  How  could  the  1,138  parts  of  the 
Greek  verb  be  reconciled  with  the  meagre  444  of  the  Latin, 
unless  they  were  tabulated  and  explained.  This  work  was 
reserved  for  Dionysius  Thrax,  a  pupil  of  Aristarchus,  who 
came  to  Rome  as  a  professor  of  Greek  in  the  century  before 
the  Christian  era.  For  convenience  he  reduced  the  sub- 
stance of  his  lectures  to  book  form — the  earliest  European 
treatise  on  grammar,  and  still  extant.  From  this  work  the 
distinctions  and  terminology  of  the  Greek  language  were 
afterwards,  by  translation  and  mistranslation,  applied  to  the 
Latin.  The  Latin  language  was  stretched  upon  the  iron 
bedstead  of  the  Greek,  as  the  languages  of  modern  Europe 
have  long  been  racked  on  that  of  the  Latin. 

The  ideas  of  grammar  were  not  applied  to  English  until 
about  the  time  of  the  Tudors,  and  then  under  the  impression 
that  every  human  dialect  could  be  laced  in  the  harness  of 
the  Latin.  The  first  text-books  used  in  the  schools  were 
written  in  that  language,  and  designed,  not  so  much  to 
teach  English  as  grammar  in  the  abstract,  as  applicable  alike 
to  all.  They  of  course  taught  only  Latin.  The  most 
famous  of  these  early  grammars  was  that  of  William  Lily, 
first  printed  in  1542  by  express  authority  of  Henry  VIIL, 
and  long  known  as  "  King  Henry's  Grammar."  Although 
called  simply  "  A  Grammar,"  and  not  the  grammar  of  any 
particular  language,  it  was  not  only  written  in,  but  related 
exclusively  to,  Latin.  And  when  the  same  author  subse- 
quently published  a  dense  black-letter  volume  with  the 
deceptive  title  of  "  Lilie's  English  Grammar,"  it  was  but  a 


The  Province  of  Grammar.  49 

collection  of  the  rules  of  the  Latin  strung  on  a  thin  thread 
of  English  text.  The  first  really  English  grammar  was 
claimed  by  William  Bullokar,  who  published  in  1586  "A 
Bref  Grammar  for  English,"  which  he  said  was  "  the  first 
Grammar  for  English  that  ever  waz  except  my  Grammar  at 
large."  Since  that  time  there  have  been  English  grammars 
innumerable,  not  a  few  of  them  written  in  Latin,  as  those 
of  John  Wallis  and  Charles  Cooper,  in  the  time  of  William 
and  Mary,  and  with  rare  exceptions  ignoring  the  real  source 
and  character  of  the  grammar  of  the  language. 

Even  so  late  as  1796  the  greatly  improved  grammar  of 
Thomas  Coar,  published  in  London,  filled  its  pages  with 
diagrams  like  the  following: 


SINGULAR 

PLURAL 

NOM. 

a  house 

NOM. 

houses 

Gen. 

of  a  house 

Gen. 

of  houses 

Dat. 

to  a  house 

Dat. 

to  houses 

Ace. 

a  house 

Ace. 

houses 

Voc. 

0  house 

Voc. 

0  houses 

Abl. 

with  a  house 

Abl. 

with  houses 

It  would  have  been  quite  as  easy  and  rational  to  have 
added  a  dozen  more  prepositions,  or  to  have  omitted  the 
most  of  these,  but  that  this  was  the  scale  recognized  in 
Latin.  Eminent  men,  not  the  authors  of  systematic  treatises 
on  grammar,  have  sometimes  furnished  valuable  suggestions. 
Roger  Bacon  pointed  out  the  folly  of  trying  to  explain 
words  by  reference  to  some  remote  language  with  which 
they  had  no  connection.  Locke  expressed  his  conviction 
that  all  words,  if  they  could  be  traced  to  their  sources, 
would  be  found  to  have  originally  denoted  visible  objects,, 
their  sensible  qualities  and  actions.  Following  up  this  hint, 
John  Home  Tooke  published  in  1786  his  famous  "  Epea 
Pteroenta,"  or  "  The  Diversions  of  Purley,"  a  work  of  singu- 
lar acuteness  and  ingenuity,  designed  to  show  that  all  our 
little  words  of  scarcely  perceptible  signification — if^  and, 
hut,  although,  etc. — are  the  relics  of  once  substantial  nouns 
and  verbs,  and  that  their  source  is  to  be  sought,  not  m. 
4 


50  The  English  Language. 

Greek  and  Latin,  but  in  the  earlier  forms  of  English  and 
the  closely  allied  languages.  Although  from  rashness  and 
imperfect  knowledge,  Home  Tooke  was  often  wrong  in  his 
derivations,  and  would  be  a  very  unsafe  guide,  still  he 
pointed  the  way  for  all  subsequent  investigators. 

The  first  grammarians,  as  Dionysius,  undertook  to  teach 
the  signification,  the  spelling,  and  the  pronunciation  of 
words;  but  that  has  long  since  been  turned  over  to  lexi- 
cographers. This  leads  to  consider  again  the  distinction 
between  the  two  classes  of  books.  The  dictionary  treats  of 
single  words,  and  one  at  a  time.  When  it  has  told  us  all  it 
has  to  say  of  any  word,  as  almanac^  boom,  yacht,  we  are  not 
thereby  helped  to  understand  the  next  word  that  occurs. 
The  grammar,  on  the  other  hand,  deals  with  classes  of  facts 
or  of  words,  and  points  out  their  distinctive  agreements  and 
differences.  In  the  sentence  "  The  swallow  _;fzVj  about  catch- 
ing flies"  the  word  flies  occurs  twice,  presenting  no  differ- 
ence to  the  eye  or  the  ear.  The  grammarian  sees  a  difference 
in  the  meaning  or  application,  and  should  at  least  try  to 
discover  whence  came  the  s  that  is  common  to  both.  By  vary- 
ing the  above  illustration  we  might  say,  "  Two  swallows 
fly  in  pursuit  of  on^  fly.''  The  curious  question  would  then 
be  presented  why  the  form  that  is  singular  for  nouns  is 
plural  for  verbs,  and  the  reverse.  Whatever  result  the 
grammarian  might  reach  in  this  case  would  be  equally  appli- 
cable in  thousands  of  others,  and  would  be  recognized  as  a 
general  principle  or  rule.  If  the  ed  in  march^^  refers  to  the 
past,  so  it  does  in  other  words,  and  if  its  history  and  signifi- 
cance be  discovered  in  one  case,  the  discovery  is  equally 
good  for  all.  Grammar  then  treats  of  everything  relating  to  a 
language  that  can  be  reduced  to  general  facts,  principles,  or 
rules.  It  has  to  deal  chiefly  with  the  various  forms  assumed 
by  the  same  words.  This  is,  in  English,  a  very  narrow  field, 
but  extremely  rocky. 

Grammar,  like  botany  or  mineralogy,  is  a  purely  descrip- 
tive science.  The  duty  of  the  grammarian  is  not  to  invent 
or  create,  but  to  state  and  classify  the  facts  as  he  finds  them. 
What  is  true  of  nothing  else  is  true  of  language,  that  whatever 


TJie  Province  of  Grammar.  5 1 

is  is  right.  Expressions  may  be  intricate,  awkward,  incon- 
sistent with  other  expressions,  difficult  for  the  tongue  or 
harsh  to  the  ear,  but  so  long  as  they  are  the  unmistakable 
symbols  of  certain  ideas,  they  answer  their  purpose.  But 
there  may  be  diflferent  and  conflicting  expressions  for  the 
same  idea.  One  class  of  speakers  say  them  is,  while  another 
say  those  are.  The  grammarian  may  indeed  point  out  that 
the  latter  phrase  is  the  most  consistent  with  general  usage, 
and  is  employed  by  the  most  careful  speakers,  and  there- 
fore preferable  ;  but  if  the  former  were  the  sole  recognized 
form,  we  should  have  to  put  up  with  it ;  and  it  would  be  as 
absurd  to  object  that  it  was  ungrammatical  as  to  accuse 
some  wild-wood  flower  of  being  unbotanical. 

But  it  may  be  objected,  "  If  grammar  does  not  make  rules 
for  the  government  of  language,  and  people  can  learn  to 
speak  and  read  without  it,  what  is  its  use?"  I  readily 
admit  that  these  considerations  deprive  it  of  a  fictitious  im- 
portance long  attached  to  it,  but  it  still  retains  a  real  value 
rarely  thought  of.  That  great  body  of  knowledge  known  as 
learning  is  valuable  indirectly  rather  than  directly.  By  it 
are  formed  habits  of  calm,  thoughtful  observation  and  dis- 
crimination that  modify  the  whole  character  of  man.  If  a 
savage  could  be  induced  to  give  his  attention  for  half  an 
hour  to  the  drawing  of  a  circle,  to  the  equality  of  its  radii, 
its  relation  to  the  hexagon,  the  ratio  of  its  inscribed  and 
circumscribed  squares,  he  would  be  a  little  less  of  a  savage 
all  his  life  after.  All  honest  pursuit  of  knowledge  has  this 
humanizing  eflfect.  The  world  has  more  faith  to-day  in 
its  men  of  science  than  in  its  princes,  prelates,  and  states- 
men ;  and  yet  a  great  part  of  science  has  no  practical  appli- 
cation. It  requires  but  a  small  part  of  astronomy  to  find  a 
ship's  place  at  sea,  or  locate  a  boundary,  and  that  small 
part  is  about  all  that  touches  his  material  interests.  Minute 
examinations  of  protoplasm,  of  annelids  and  bacteria,  are 
commended  as  science,  even  by  men  who  would  scout  phi- 
lology as  a  waste  of  time  upon  "  mere  words."  Yet  if  man  is 
the  highest  of  earthly  creatures,  and  language  his  most  dis- 
tinctive attribute,  that  too  may  merit  some  attention.     Sir 


52  The  English  Language. 

Samuel  Baker  thought  he  could  distintinguish  nine  distinct 
calls — a  language  in  embryo — used  by  the  baboons  of 
Abyssinia;  and  Dr.  Charles  A.  Abbott  claims  to  have 
found  twenty-seven  separate  caws  among  the  American 
crows.'  The  verification  of  these  cries  would  be  esteemed  as 
a  valuable  contribution  to  natural  history,  even  if  we  should 
never  have  occasion  to  converse  with  crows  or  baboons.  A 
much  higher  interest  attaches  to  the  study  of  language. 
Like  everything  else  in  these  days,  it  is  the  result  of  growth 
and  development  under  conditions  and  laws  that  can  be  in 
part  ascertained.  Each  word  has  a  pedigree  reaching  back 
to  the  times  of  the  paleolithic  cave-dwellers.  The  philolo- 
gist may  be  compared  to  the  geologist  found  poring  over  a 
gravel  bank  or  a  ridge  of  disjointed  stones,  who  explains  to 
the  curious  wayfarer  that  each  pebble  or  block  has  a  history 
of  its  own — a  part  of  the  history  of  our  planet.  Not  one  of 
them  is  a  native  of  this  place,  or  has  the  form  it  once  bore. 
They  have  been  torn  from  their  distant  beds  by  successive 
convulsions  or  slow  upheavals,  rolled  for  ages  in  currents  of 
water  until  their  angles  are  worn  off,  borne  across  seas  by 
drifting  ice,  or  dragged  snail-pace  over  the  land  by  glaciers. 
Here,  side  by  side,  lie  fragments  of  granite  and  quartz,  with 
Silurian  slates  and  limestones,  breccias,  porphyry,  and  basalt. 
We  can  trace  the  track  of  some ;  and  were  our  knowledge 
complete  we  could  find  the  distant  source  of  each.  From 
the  mould  overlying  some,  their  coming  must  have  been 
long  ago.     Somewhat  similar  is  the  position  of  language. 

It  has  been  intimated  already  that  the  chief  part  of  gram- 
mar is  declension  and  conjugation,  and  that  these  in  English 
are  scanty.  Indeed,  our  language  offers  but  the  scattered 
remains  of  an  inflexional  system.  In  this  respect  the  inflec- 
tional systems  of  Latin  and  Greek,  for  example,  might  be 
likened  to  skeletons  set  up  in  a  museum,  bloodless  and  life- 
less, indeed,  but  with  every  bone  and  joint  in  its  place.  On 
the  other  hand,  English  presents  only  here  and  there  a  bone, 
so  broken  and  worn  as  to  be  identified  with  difficulty  and 
only  by  comparison  with  the  appropriate  skeleton. 

'  Popular  Science  Monthly,  vol.  xxv.,  p.  475. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

WORD   MAKING. 

The  reading  public,  at  least  of  this  country,  owe  much  to 
Professor  Max  Miiller.  He  has  furnished  them  a  great 
amount  of  philological  information  in  a  very  attractive  form, 
and  he  has  given  every  one  something  that  he  can  take 
ex>ception  to.  Among  others  is  the  dictum  that  "  No  man 
ever  invents  an  entirely  new  word."  It  is  true,  indeed,  that 
the  scholar,  with  a  wealth  of  words,  ancient  and  modern,  will 
rarely  contrive  a  new  combination  of  sounds,  which  would 
necessarily  be  unintelligible.  But  pure  invention  comes  of 
poverty  rather  than  of  riches,  and  those  who  have  fewest 
words  have  the  greatest  temptation  to  invent.  Little  chil- 
dren often  form  new  combinations,  that  become  for  a  time 
household  words,  while  a  few  obtain  a  wider  circulation. 
The  very  illiterate  are  prone  to  do  the  same,  and  it  is  prob- 
able that  many  low  words,  like  bamboozle,  cavort,  doggerel, 
splurge,  scalliwag,  and  mulligrubs,  originated  in  this  way. 
Mormon,  now  familiar  to  the  whole  world,  is  an  entirely  fac- 
titious word.  Persons  with  no  lack  of  words  occasionally 
amuse  themselves  by  contriving  new  ones.  Opodeldoc  is  an 
invention  of  Paracelsus,  and  Decandolle,  the  Swiss  botanist, 
devised  sepal  to  designate  a  division  of  the  calix  of  a  flower. 
The  word  quiz  was  introduced  by  the  keeper  of  a  Dublin 
theatre  named  Daly,  on  a  bet  that  a  new  word  of  no  mean- 
ing would  become  the  town-talk  in  twenty-four  hours.  He 
gained  the  wager  by  setting  boys  to  chaHc  the  word  upon 
walls.  Van  Helmont  proposed  two  new  words — gas,  to  de- 
note a  form  of  matter  then  attracting  attention,  and  bias  for 
a  supposed  influence  of  the  stars.     The  world  having  use  for 

53 


54  The  English  Language. 

the  word  gas,  and  not  for  its  fellow,  the  former  has  had  uni- 
versal acceptance,  the  latter  total  neglect,  Darwin  or  Huxley 
could  not  find  a  clearer  case  of  survival  of  the  fittest.  Still, 
with  few  exceptions,  all  the  words  we  are  likely  to  meet  with 
are  made  up  of  modifications  or  combinations  of  previous 
words. 

Doubtless  there  was  a  time  when  all  the  words  of  our  early 
ancestors  were  few  and  simple,  each  consisting  of  a  single 
vowel — a,  i,  o — a  vowel  preceded  by  a  single  consonant — do, 
be,  go,  no,  say — or  a  combination  of  the  two,  as  ado,  ego,  era. 
In  many  languages  the  words  are  still  chiefly  made  up  of 
alternate  consonants  and  vowels.  In  all  the  Polynesian 
tongues  no  syllable  ends  with  a  consonant,  and  two  conso- 
nants never  come  together.  The  words  are  formed  on  the 
pattern  of  ta-bu,  Ta-hi-ti,  la-ve-na,  Ho-no-lu-lu.  In  many  of 
the  native  American  languages  this  habit  is  quite  observable. 
In  50  pages  of  the  Hidatsa  Dictionary  of  Dr.  Matthews  I 
find  but  30  syllables  that  end  with  consonants.  Many  other 
languages  show  a  dislike  to  certain  consonantal  endings. 
Every  Chinese  word  is  a  single  syllable,  ending  either  with 
a  vowel  or  a  nasal.  Greek  admitted  no  final  consonants 
except  n,  r,  and  s ;  the  French  suppresses  many  in  pronun- 
ciation ;  and  modern  German  discards  the  sounds  of  final  b, 
d,  g,  V,  and  2.  It  is  probable  that  wherever  several  conso- 
nants come  together  intervening  vowels  have  been  suppressed. 

In  respect  to  signification,  these  earliest  words  were  prob- 
ably nouns,  adjectives,  or  verbs — that  is,  they  represented 
things,  qualities,  or  actions  indifferently  as  occasion  might 
require.  If  we  say  that  a  man  brings  a  saw^nd  a  saw-horse 
to  saw  a  load  of  wood,  we  employ  the  same  word  succes- 
sively as  noun,  adjective,  and  verb.  In  English,  this  free- 
and-easy  way  of  playing  at  rights  and  lefts  is  very  common 
and  very  convenient,  as  when  we  say  a  bean-pole  and  a  pole- 
bean,  a  cart-horse  and  a  horse-cart.  In  Chinese,  which  is  the 
most  primitive  form  of  human  speech,  and  therefore  one  of 
the  most  instructive,  every  word  is  of  one  syllable,  and  every 
syllable  a  word,  unchangeable  except  in  the  tone  of  utter- 
ance ;  and  grammatical  distinction  is  unknown.     Thus  ta,  as 


Word  Making.  55 

a  noun,  is  greatness ;  as  an  adjective,  great ;  as  a  verb,  to 
grow  or  be  great ;  and  as  an  adverb,  greatly.  Of  these 
primary  Chinese  monosyllables  there  are  reckoned  450,  and 
it  is  thought  that  no  language  has  a  much  larger  number  of 
ultimate  elements. 

These  primitive  syllables  are  often  called  roots,  as  many 
of  them  have  produced  abundant  crops  of  derived  words. 
We  may  get  an  idea  of  a  root  sufficient  for  our  present  pur- 
pose by  taking  such  a  series  as  corn-pel,  d\s-pel,  ex-/^/,  im- 
pel,  ^xo-pel,  XQ-pel,  and  calling  pel  a  root  with  the  sense  of 
drive.  The  other  syllables  in  this  instance  are  termed  pre- 
fixes;  if  they  followed  the  root,  they  would  be  called  suffixes. 
The  root  itself  may  undergo  changes,  as  in  com-/«/-sory,  im- 
pul-swQ.  As  the  same  root  may  run  through  a  large  family 
of  languages,  it  can  sometime''  be  traced  in  several  thou- 
sand combinations.  The  same  prefixes  and  suffixes  may  be 
attached  to  many  different  roots :  thus  z«-tend,  2«-spire,  in- 
iliction. 

While  the  earliest  words,  no  doubt,  represented  material 
visible  things,  their  qualities  and  actions,  one  may  see,  by 
turning  over  the  leaves  of  a  dictionary,  how  they  become 
freighted  with  secondary  and  figurative  meanings.  In  this 
way  all  terms  for  abstract  and  immaterial  things  are  ob- 
tained. The  original  meaning  is  often  lost  sight  of,  and  the 
derived  alone  remains.  Thus  spirit  once  meant  only  breath 
— inspire  and  ex-pire,  to  breathe  in  and  breathe  out — compre- 
hend was  to  grasp  and  hold  together,  and  disgust  was  a  bad 
taste  in  the  mouth.  At  a  very  early  period,  too,  a  few  roots 
must  have  assumed  a  pronominal  character.  They  became 
hieroglyphic  or  short-hand  expressions,  denoting  in  them- 
selves neither  things,  qualities,  nor  actions.  They  were  in 
signification  such  words  as  here,  there,  this,  and  that,  accom- 
panied no  doubt  with  the  act  of  pointing  with  the  finger. 
But  while  we  should  naturally  expect  our  first  ancestors  to 
have  busied  themselves  like  Adam  in  giving  "  names  to  all 
cattle,"  it  is  remarkable  to  observe  that  the  tendency  of 
research  in  the  most  developed  languages — the  Aryan  and 
Shemitic — is  to  show  that  the  oldest  words  that   can  be 


56  The  English  Language. 

reached  represented,  not  things,  but  quaHties  and  actions. 
Still  we  must  remember  on  the  other  hand  that  the  vedic 
hymns  and  the  martial  ode  of  Debprah  are  relatively  little 
nearer  the  beginning  of  things  than  we  are. 

I  have  said  that  Chinese  retains  the  most  primitive  char- 
acter, consisting  of  single  syllables,  every  one  uttered  sepa- 
rately as  a  child  begins  to  read.  Most  other  peoples  think 
this  too  slow.  Not  content  with  learning  to  do  a  thing,  they 
want  to  do  it  quickly  and  with  little  labor.  Let  us  take  a 
French  sentence  as  an  example — "  Tu  as  ce  que  il  te  fauty 
No  Frenchman  utters  this  as  seven  separate  words.  What 
he  does  say  is  something  like,  "  Tua  skeelt  fo,"  and  his  whole 
language  is  similarly  compressed.  The  motive  is  to  so  great 
an  extent  the  saving  of  labor  that  laziness  has  been  recog- 
nized as  one  of  the  chief  factors  in  the  production  and  con- 
fusion of  tongues.  Words  that  happen  to  be  used  often 
together  come  to  be  combined  and  pronounced  as  one.  This 
is  a  gradual  process  in  which  we  easily  distinguish  three 
steps.  In  brick  house  we  have  two  distinct  words,  but  brick 
has  become  an  adjective  descriptive  of  house  ;  in  work-house 
two  words  are  treated  as  one,  but  to  show  that  they  are  not 
yet  perfectly  consolidated,  a  hyphen  (-)  is  placed  between 
them.  The  first  part  is  uttered  forcibly,  the  second  lightly. 
The  greater  stress  is  called  accent,  and  the  two  parts  have 
but  one — that  is,  they  are  accented  as  one  word.  When  we 
come  to  householder  we  are  no  longer  notified  that  the  parts 
were  ever  separate.  Under  which  of  the  three  forms  we 
shall  find  any  combination  depends  on  length  and  frequency 
of  use.  Turnspit  is  written  without,  and  turn-table  with,  a 
hyphen,  because  the  English  people  have  been  much  longer 
used  to  roasting  meat  on  a  spit  than  to  turning  railroad  cars 
on  a  table. 

But  laziness  will  not  rest  here.  Compound  words  must 
next  be  shortened.  The  Danes  have  a  pair  that  are  very 
handy — faster,  a  father's  sister,  and  moster,  a  mother's  sister. 
Comparable  to  these  are  the  gaffer  and  gammer,  for  grand- 
father and  grandmother,  that  used  to  be  commonly  heard  in 
the  West  of  England.     To  take  a  few  more  miscellaneous 


Word  Making.  57 

examples,  the  Portuguese  coin  moidore  is  moeda  de  ouro ; 
priest  is  reduced  from  presbuteros,  bishop  from  episcopos,  and 
alms  from  eleemosune.  Our  simple  word  which  once  had  an 
/  in  it,  and  the  Saxons  commonly  called  it  hwilc,  which  was 
itself  an  abbreviation,  the  fuller  form  being  hwilic,  what-like. 
If  we  go  back  to  the  fourth  century  we  shall  find  that  the 
Goths  had  a  still  fuller  form,  hweleiks.  Our  fathers  in  the 
days  of  the  great  Alfred,  in  praying  for  their  "  daily  bread," 
took  time  to  call  it  daeghwamlican  hldf.  Let  us  see  what 
we  have  made  of  these  two  words.  We  will  take  the  last 
first.  We  have  thrown  away  the  initial  h,  turned  the  Saxon 
long  a  according  to  our  wont  into  a  long  0,  and  now  write 
the  word  loaf.  From  the  more  formidable  looking  word  we 
have  dropped  the  termination  an,  the  g  of  daeg,  a  day,  and 
hwam,  meaning  each.  We  have  also  reduced  lie,  like,  to  the 
now  unmeaning  ly.  Taking  these  successive  amputations  in 
the  order  named,  we  should  see  the  word  as  daeghwamlican, 
daeghwamlic,  daehwamlic,  daelic,  daely.  These  changes  were 
not  all  made  in  a  day.  The  tendency  here  illustrated  is  not 
exceptional.  All  languages  that  are  at  all  developed  are  full 
of  it.  In  fact  that  is  what  development  means.  The  effect 
is  sometimes  curious.  We  will  take  as  an  example  the 
French  aujourd' hui,  meaning  now,  to-day.  First  separate 
it  into  aujour  d'  hui ;  next  observe  that  au  =^  a  le  ^=-  Latin 
ad  ilium,  that  Jour  is  from  the  Latin  diurnus,  that  d'  =  de, 
and  hui  is  Latin  hodie  =  hoc  die.  Treated  in  this  manner  it 
can  be  stretched  out  into  the  very  low  Latin  of  ad  ilium, 
diurnum  de  hoc  die.  In  like  manner  mim,e  is  discovered  to 
be  a  desiccated  preparation  of  semetipsissimus.  But  such 
choice  specimens  are  not  confined  to  French.  Old  authors 
give  an  English  phrase  of  the  seventeenth  century  which 
they  write  inuskiditti,  meaning  much  good  may  it  do  you  ;  and 
Shakespeare  has  gddigod^n  for  God  give  you  a  good  even.  The 
modern  editions  naturally  give  it  quite  incorrectly ;  see 
"  Romeo  and  Juliet,"  Act  iii..  Scene  2.  But  the  masterpiece 
of  all  is  the  one  most  common.  The  final  m  of  the  house- 
maid's hourly  Yes'm  is  all  that  remains  of  the  once  dignified 
mea  domina. 


58  The  English  Language. 

Languages  differ  greatly  in  their  aptitude  for  forming 
compound  words.  Chinese  does  not  admit  of  them  at  all ; 
Spanish  has  few  of  native  growth  ;  French  has  less  ability  to 
form  them  than  English ;  and  this  last  has  to  a  great  extent 
lost  the  habit.  There  are  three  European  languages — Ger- 
man, Russian,  and  Greek — that  have  almost  unlimited  capa- 
bility of  forming  new  verbal  combinations.  Owing  to  the 
excess  of  consonants,  German  words  are  apt  to  be  unwieldy, 
like  Einwanderungsgesellschaft  and  Unabhdngichkeitserkld- 
rungen.  In  most  instances  each  section  begins  and  ends  with 
consonants,  and,  in  the  language  of  working  mechanics,  the 
joints  show.  English  labors  under  the  same  disadvantage, 
but  to  a  still  greater  extent.  Milk-maid  may  as  well  be 
deemed  two  words  as  one.  It  is  not  an  indivisible  whole, 
like  the  Greek  derivations  astronomy  and  geology.  It  is 
partly  from  this  cause,  and  partly  from  the  early  acquired 
habit  of  adopting  French,  Latin,  and  Greek  terms,  that  for 
the  higher  purposes  of  literature  and  science  we  rarely  form 
a  new  word  from  native  material.  English,  as  we  know  it,  is 
doubtless  a  very  noble  language ;  but  well  it  may  be,  for  it 
has  at  command  all  the  resources  of  at  least  three.  Confined 
to  the  original  Saxon,  it  would  be  very  far  from  what  it  is. 

By  long  use  and  attrition,  words  quite  diverse  in  their 
origin  come  to  be  written  or  pronounced  alike.  These 
homonyms,  as  they  are  called,  are  quite  numerous.  The  fol- 
lowing, although  less  than  a  fiftieth  part  of  them,  will  be 
sufficient  to  make  their  character  intelligible : 

bay,  I.  Old  French  bai^  Lat.  badius^  reddish  brown. 

2.  Fr,  baie,  Lat.  bacca,  a  berry — a  kind  of  laurel  tree. 

3.  Fr.  bale,  Lat.  baia,  an  inlet  of  the  sea. 

4.  Fr.  abboyer,  to  bark. 
cleave,     i.  Anglo-Saxon  cleofan,  to  split. 

2.  A.-S.  difian,  to  adhere. 
dock,        I.  Norse  dockr,  the  tail — to  cut  short. 

2.  A.-S.  doccCy  a  plant. 

3.  Old  Dutch  dokka,  a  place  to  lay  ships. 
fell,            I.  The  past  tense  of  fall. 

2.  A.-S.  fellaUy  to  cut  or  knock  down. 


Word  Making,  59 

3.  A.-S.  fel,  fierce,  destructive. 

4.  A.-S.  fell,  the  skin. 

5.  Norse  /Jail,  a  mountain  ridge. 

gill-,         I.  "NoTse  £jolnar,  the  breathing  organs  in  fishes. 

2.  Norse  gt'l,  a  ravine. 

3.  Old  Fr.  gt'lle,  the  fourth  part  of  a  pint. 

4.  Lat.  yulia,  also  the  ground  ivy,  nepeta  glechoma. 
let-,           I.  A.-S.  Icetan,  to  permit. 

2.  A.-S.  lettan,  to  hinder. 

In  languages  having  short  words  homonyms  abound,  and 
sometimes  greatly  embarrass  the  learner.  In  monosyllabic 
Chinese  they  are  his  principal  difficulty. 

In  words  like  wind-mill  and  horse-back  the  elements  remain 
as  complete  and  distinguishable  as  in  Chinese ;  but  in  such  a 
word  as  un-kind-ness  there  are  two  parts  that  no  longer  exist 
as  separate  expressions.  Most  persons  would  surmise  that 
the  prefix  un  implied  negation  ;  but  many  would  be  puzzled 
to  assign  a  meaning  to  the  suffix  ness.  Language  is  full  of 
prefixes,  suffixes,  and  interpolated  syllables  and  letters  that 
have  no  longer  any  independent  life  of  their  own,  but  cling 
like  parasites  to  the  more  obviously  significant  parts  of 
words.  In  un-sym-tnetr-ic-al-ly  the  main  root  of  the  word 
is  metr,  to  which  are  attached  two  prefixes  and  three  suffixes. 
The  origin  and  meaning  of  some  of  these  affixes  can  be 
traced,  of  some  conjectured,  and  of  others  not  even  guessed. 

The  following  are  the  principal  prefixes  that  occur  in 
English : 

a-,  I.  Greek  a,  without — acephalous,  amorphous. 

2.  Lat.  a,  shortened  from  ab,  from,  by,  with — amanuensis, 

avert. 

3.  Lat.  ad,  to — ameliorate,  astringent. 

4.  Lat.  e  for  ex,  from — amend  from  emendare,  through 

Old  Fr.  amender. 

5.  Gothic  us,  ur,  Norse  or,  forth — arise,  awake. 

6.  A.-S.  of,  from — adown  ;  A.-S.  of  dune,  from  the  hill. 

7.  A.-S.  and,  over  against,  like  Gr.  avri — along. 

8.  A.-S.  on,  on,  in,  at — afoot,  aground,  asleep. 

9.  A.-S.  dn,  one — apace,  apiece. 


6o  The  English  Language. 

10.  A.-S.^(?,  without  any  appreciable  signification — aware ; 

\.\i\o\x^  gewaer,  ywar  ox  y ewer ^  twar,  aware. 

11.  Norse  a/,  to — ado. 

12.  Fr.  a,  to— achieve,  from  a  chief,  Lat.  ad  caput. 

13.  Fr.  he,  interjectional — alas  ;  Fr.  hdas. 

14.  Dutch  houd,  hold — avast,  from  houd  vast,  hold  fast. 

15.  Dutch  aan,  to,  towards — aloof. 

16.  Arabic  al,  the — apricot,  introduced  by  the  Portuguese. 
ab-,         I.  Lat,  ab,  from — abjure,  aberration. 

2.  Lat.  ad,  to — abbreviate. 
abs-,  Lat.  abs,  from — abscond,  abstract. 

ac-,  Lat.  ad,  to — access,  accommodate. 

ad-,         I.  Lat.  ad — admire,  administer. 

2.  Lat.  ab — advance.     The  "  d  "  is  an  interpolation  of 
about  the  year  1500.     The  word  was  previously 
written  avance,  Fr.  avancer,  from  Lat.  ab  ante. 
adv-,  Lat.  ab — advantage. 

af",  Lat.  ad — afifix,  affidavit,  affront. 

ag-,  Lat.  ad — aggregate,  aggravate. 

al-,  I.  Lat.  ad — alliteration,  alluvium. 

2.  A.-S.  eal,  all — alone,  altogether,  always. 

3.  Span,  el,  the — alligator,  i.  e.,  eljagarto. 

4.  Arab,  al,  the — alcohol,  algebra,  alkali. 
am-,        I.  Lat.  ad — ammunition. 

2.  Lat.  in — ambush. 

3.  Lat.  a7n,  shortened  from  ambi,  around — amputate,  to 

prune  around. 
amb-,  Lat.  ambi — ambient,  ambition. 

ambi-,    i.  Lat.  ambi — ambiguous. 

2.  Lat.  ambo,  both — ambidextrous. 
amphi-,      Gr.  a/ucpi,  around,  on  both  sides — amphitheatre. 
an-,         I.  Gr.  ay,    Eng.  un — anarchy,   anhydrous,   anodyne. 

2.  Lat.  ad — annex,  annul. 
ana-,  Gr.  ava,  up,  back  again,  reverse — anatomy,  anagram. 

ant-,  Gr.  avTi,  against — antacid,  antagonist. 

ante  Lat.  ante,  before — antedate,  antediluvian. 

anti-,  Gr.  avri — antidote,  antichrist. 

ap-,        I.  Gr.  aTTo,  from — apanthropy,  aphelion. 

2.  Lat.  ad — appeal,  append. 
apo-,  Gr.  arto,  — apogee,  apostate. 


Word  Making, 


6i 


ar-, 
as-, 

at-, 

aut-, 

auto-, 

be-, 


bene-, 
bi-, 

bin-, 
bis-, 
by-, 


cat-, 

cata-, 
circu-, 
circum-, 
cis-, 

CO-, 

col-, 

com-, 

comb-, 

con-, 

contra-, 

contro-, 

coun-, 

counter-, 

CU-, 

cur-, 


Lat.  ad — arrive,  arrogant. 

Lat.  ad — ascend,  assist. 

Arab,  al — assegay. 

Lat.  ad — attend,  attest. 

A.-S.  cet,  Eng.  at — atone,  i.  e.,  at  one. 

Gr.  airto?,  self — authentic. 

Gr.  avTo? — autocrat,  autograph. 

A.-S.  fie,  a  shortened  form  of  h',  a  prefix  of  very 
wide  application.  With  verbs  it  intensifies  or 
applies  the  action  to  some  object,  as  in  bedew,  be- 
moan, benumb.  With  prepositions  it  has  little 
force  ;  perhaps  defines  location  more  exactly,  as 
in  before,  behind,  beneath. 

Lat.  bene,  well — benefit,  benevolent. 

Gr.  ini,  upon,  over — bishop  from  iniffKOTto?. 

Lat.  bi  =  dui,  from  duo,  two — biennium,  bifurcated. 

Lat.  binus,  double — binocular,  binoxyde. 

Lat.  bis,  twice — bissextile,  bistort. 

Eng.  by — by-path,  by-stander. 

Dan.  by,  a  town — by-law  ;  Dan.  bylov,  Icel.  bcejar 
log,  local  or  municipal  regulations. 

Gr.  naraf  down,  by,  confronting— catacoustics,  cate- 
chise, catholic. 

Gr.  Kara — catalepsy,  catastrophe. 

Lat.  circum,  around,  about — circuit,  circulate. 

Lat.  circum — circumference,  circumnavigate. 

Lat.  cis,  on  this  side — cisalpine,  cisatlantic. 

Lat.  CO,  for  con,  a  form  of  cum,  with,  together — co- 
agulate. 

Lat.  con  =  cum — collateral,  collocate. 

Lat.  com  =z  cum — commingle,  commotion. 

Lat.  com — combustion. 

Lat.  con — concatenation,  concur. 

Lat.  contra,  against — contradict,  contravene. 

Lat.  contro,  against-^<;ontrovert. 

Lat.  con — council,  counsellor. 

Fr.  contre  from  Lat.  contra — countermand. 

Lat.  con — custom,  from  consuetudo. 

Lat.  con — curry,  to  work,  or  dress,  i.  e.,  hides,  a 
horse,  etc.     Note. — To  curry  favor  is  a  corrup- 


62  The  English  Language, 

tion  of  curry  Favell,  that  being  an  old  English 
proper  name  for  a  horse. 
d-,  Fr.  de,  of — daffodil — fleur  d'asphodUe. 

de-,  1.  Lat.  de,  down,  from — decapitate,  degrade. 

2.  Fr.  dcy  Old  Fr.   des,  Lat.  dis^  asunder  ;    sometimes 
negative  and  oppositive,  at  other  times  intensive, 
or  with  a  variety  of  meanings  scarcely  perceptible 
— deform,  defraud,  desiccate,  desolate,  destroy. 
3.  Lat.  dis — defer,  delay,  deluge. 

Lat.  dimidiuSy  half — demigod,  demilune. 
Fr.  des,  Lat.  dis — despatch,  dessert. 
Gr.  SioCy  through,  apart— diaeresis,  dioptric. 
Gr.  Sky  twice — diphthong,  diptych,  distich. 
Lat.  dis — digress,  dijudicate. 
Lat.  de,  down — distil. 
Gr.  6ia — diameter,  diaphanous. 
Lat.  dis — differ,  diffuse. 

Lat.  dis,  often  with  an  adversative  signification — dis- 
honor. 
Gr.  6v?y  painful,  difficult — dyspepsia,  dyspnoea. 
Lat.  e,  out  of — evade,  evolve,  edict. 
Fr.  prosthetic,  without  meaning — esquire,  from  Lat. 

scutum. 
Du.  ofit,  away — elopement. 
Gr.  SK,  out  of — eccentric,  ecstasy. 
Lat.  ex,  from,  out  of — efflorescence,  effrontery. 
Gr.  ivy  in — ellipse. 
2.  Arab,  al  or  el,  the — elixir,  Arab,  el  iksir,  the  philoso- 
pher's stone. 
em-,        I.  Gr.  iv — emphasis,  empiric. 

2.  Fr.  em,  from  Lat.  in — embroider,  emboss. 
en-,         I.  Gr.  iv — encyclical,  encyclopaedia,  energy. 

2.  Fr.  en,  from  Lat.  in,  negative  =  Eng.  un — enmity. 
endo-,         Gr.  ivSoVy  within — endogenous. 
enter-,        Fr.  entre,  Lat.  inter,  among — entertain. 
ento-,  Gr.  ivro?,  within — entoblast,  entozoon. 

ep-,  Gr.  €7ti,  upon — ephemeral. 

epi-,  Gr.  ETci — epigram,  epitaph. 

equ-,  Lat.  cequus — equal,  equanimity. 

eso-,  Gr.  'kacoy  within — esoteric. 


demi-, 

des-, 

di-. 

I. 

2. 

3- 

4- 

dia-, 

dif-, 

dis-. 

dys-. 

e-, 

I. 

2. 

3- 

ec-, 

ef-, 

el-, 

I. 

Word  Making. 


63 


eu-, 
ev-, 
ex-, 

exo-, 

extra-, 
for-, 


fore-, 


gain-, 

hemi-, 

hetero-, 

holo-, 

homo-, 

hyp-, 

hyper-, 

hypo-, 

i-. 


im-, 
in-. 


inter-, 

intra-, 

intro-, 

ir-, 

iso-, 

juxta-, 

2 
mal-,     I 


Gr.  EVy  well,  pleasantly — eulogy,  euphony. 

Gr.  EV — evangelist. 

Gr.  €$y  from — exodus,  exotic. 

Lat.  ex,  out  from — exculpate,  expel,  expose. 

Gr,  s^cOy  outside — exogenous. 

Lat.  extra,  beyond — extraordinary,  extradition. 

A.S./or,  only  found  as  a  prefix,  with  the  sense  of 
away  from  ;  or  it  intensifies  the  verb.  The  com^ 
pounds  are  :  forbear,  forbid,  forfend,  forget,  for- 
give, forgo,  for  let,  forlorn,  forsake,  forswear. 

Fr.  for,  Lat.  foris,  outdoors — forfeit, 

A.-S.  for,  as  above — forego,  should  have  been  forgo. 

K.S.fore,  before — forebode,  forewarn. 

Fr.  for,  Lat.  foris — foreclose,  more  correctly  forclose. 

A.-S.  gegn,  against — gainsay. 

Gr.  rijxi,  half — hemisphere. 

Gr.  Irfpo?,  other — heterodox,  heterogeneous. 

Gr.  o\o<i,  whole — holocaust,  holograph. 

Gr.  ofxoi,  alike — homogeneous,  homologous. 

Gr.  imoy  under — hyp-hen — under  one. 

Gr.  VTCap,  over,  beyond — hyperborean,  hypertrophy. 

Gr.  V7to — hypogean,  hyponitrous. 

Lat.  in,  negative — ignominy,  ignorance. 

Lat,  in,  in  or  into — illuminate,  illustrate.  Note. — In, 
prefixed  to  verbs,  is  usually  equal  to  Eng.  in,  into, 
upon  ;  with  adjectives  =  un. 

Lat.  in,  negative — illegal,  illiterate. 

Lat.  in,  with  both  significations — implant,  impure. 

Lat.  in — infuse,  intemperate. 

A.-S.  in — inland,  inlet. 

Lat.  inter,  between — interlude,  intercostal, 

Lat.  intra,  within — intramural. 

Lat.  intro,  into — introduce,  introspection. 

Lat.  in,  as  above — irradiate,  irrational. 

Gr.  iGoiy  equal — isometric,  isothermal. 

Lat.  Juxta,  near — ^juxtaposition. 

A.-S.  eal,  all — lone,  contracted  from  alone — i.  e.,  all  one. 

Arab,  al,  the — lute. 

Fr.  mal,  Lat.  male,  ill — malpractice,  malversation. 

Ital.  mala,  bad — malaria. 


64 


The  English  Language, 


mon-, 
mono-, 
multi-, 
n-,  I. 


male-,        Lat,  male — malediction,  malevolence. 

me-,  Gr.  tfixiy  half — megrim,  from  hemicrania. 

medi-,        Lat,  medlus,  middle — mediaeval. 

meso-,        Gr.  jxiffo?,  middle — mesocarp,  mesogastric. 

met-,  Gr.  jjistoij  with,  after,  altered — metonomy,  metempsy- 

chosis. 

meta-,        Gr.  fxera — metaphor. 

mid-,      I.  A.-S.  mid,  middle — midnight,  midrib. 
2.  A.-S.  midj  with — midwife. 

mis-,      I.  A.-S.  mis,  wrong — misdeed,  mistake, 

2.  Old.  Fr.  mes,  Lat.  minus,  less,  imperfect — misalliance, 
miscount. 
Gr.  fxovo?,  single — monarch,  monandria 
Gr.  /Aovo? — monogram,  monomania. 
Lat.  muUi,  many — multiform,  multiply. 
An  n  has  been  transferred  to  a  few  words,  to  which  it 
did  not  originally  belong,  from  a  preceding  an,  as 
newf,  for  an  ewt ;  nugget,  for  an  ingot.     In  the 
phrase — for  the  nonce — the  n  was  the  dative  end- 
ing of  the  article — for  then  ones.     On  the  other 
hand,  an  n  has  been  transferred  to  the  preceding 
article  from  nadder,  napron,  nauger,  norange,  nouch, 
and  numpire. 
2.  A.-S,  ne,  negative  prefix — naught,  none. 

ne-,  Lat.  ne,  negative — nefarious,  nescience. 

neg-,  Lat.  nee,  negative — neglect. 

neo-,  Gr.  veo?,  new — neology,  neozoic. 

non-,  Lat.  non,  not — nondescript,  nonsense. 

ob-,  Lat.  olf,  generally  with  the  sense  of  against — obdurate, 

obstruct,  obloquy. 

0C-,  Lat.  od — occur,  occasion. 

of-,  Lat.  o3 — offend. 

op-,  Lat.  o6 — oppose,  opprobrium, 

or-,         I.  A,  S,  or,  out  of,  away  from — ordeal,  i.  e.,  or-deal. 
2.  Du.  over,  over — orlop, 

ortho-,       Gr.  opdos,  right — orthography,  orthoclase. 

outr-,  Fr.  outre,  Lat.  ultra — outrage,  i.  e.,  outr-age,  not  out- 

rage. 

palim-,       Gr.  TcdXir,  again — palimpsest. 

palin-,        Gr.  ttocXiv — palinode,  palindrome. 


Word  Making. 


65 


pan-, 
panto-, 
par-,      I. 

2. 

3- 

4- 

para-, 
pari-, 
pea-,      I. 


pel-, 

pen-, 

per-, 

peri-, 

pil-, 

pol-, 

poly-, 

por-, 

pos-, 


post-, 
prae-, 
prseter-, 
pre-, 
preter-, 
prim-, 
primo-, 
pro-,      I. 
2. 

pros-, 

proto-, 

pui-, 


pur-, 

Ram-, 
re-, 
red-, 
retro-, 

5 


Gr.  Ttav,  all — panacea,  panoply. 

Gr.  Ttccvro^  crude  form  of  na<i^  all — pantomime. 

Gr.  Ttapa,  alongside — parallel,  parhelion. 

Lat.  parum,  little — paraffine. 

Yx.par,  'LaX.  per,  through — paramour,  pardon. 

Yx.parer,  to  parry — parasol,  parachute. 

Gr.  Ttapa — paragraph,  parameter. 

Lat./<zr,  equal — parity,  parisyllable. 

Lat.  pavo — peacock. 

Du.  pij\  a  coat — pea-jacket. 

Lat./^r,  through,  thoroughly — pellucid. 

'LoX.pene,  almost — peninsula,  penumbra. 

Lat.  per — perambulate,  percolate,  permutation. 

Gr.  Ttspi,  around — perihelion,  perimeter. 

Lat.  per — pilgrim, 

Lat./£'r,  ox  port,  towards — pollute. 

Gr.  TtoXv?,  many — polygon,  polypus. 

Lat.  por^  or  port — portent. 

Lat.  por,  ox  port — possess. 

Lat.  potts,  able — possible. 

'LaX.post,  after — postpone,  postscript. 

Lat.  prcB,  before — praemunire. 

\,dX.  prater,  past,  beyond — prseterist. 

'LdX.  pre,  iox prce — preamble,  prejudge. 

Lat.  preter,  iox prcetei — preternatural. 

\,2X.  primus,  first — primeval,  primordial. 

Lat.  primus — primogeniture. 

Gr.  Ttpo,  before — program,  propyleum. 

Lat.  pro,  forward,    forth,    from — procrastinate,    pro- 

V    gress. 

GrSfcTpo?,  towards — proselyte,  prosody. 

Gr.  7ip<S}roi ,  first — protosulphate,  protozoic. 

Lat.  post,  after — Fr.  puine.  Old  Fr.  puisne,  Lat.  post 

natus. 
Lat.  per — purlieu. 
Lat.  pro — purloin. 

Fr.  rem,  from  Lat.  re  and  in — rampart. 
Lat,  re  or  red — back,  again — refund,  relapse. 
Lat.  re  or  red — redolent,  redemption. 
Lat.  retro,  backwards — retrograde,  retrospect. 


66 


The  English  La7iguage. 


S-, 

se-, 

sed-, 

semi-, 

sempi-, 

sesqui-, 

sim-, 

simul-, 

so-, 


soli-, 

SU-, 

sub-, 

subter-, 

sue-, 

suf-, 

sug-, 

sup-, 

super-, 

supra-, 

sur-. 


SUS-, 

syl-, 
sym-, 
syn-, 
t-, 


tauto-, 
to-,        I. 


tra-, 
trans-, 


Lat.  se  or  sed,  apart — sure,  from  securus. 

Lat.  se  or  sed — secede,  segregate. 

Lat.  se  or  sed — sedition. 

Lat.  semi,  half — semiannual,  semicircle. 

Lat.  semper,  ever,  forever — sempiternal. 

Lat.  sesqui,  one  and  a  half — sesquisulphide. 

Lat.  radical  sim,  single — simplicity. 

Lat.  simul,  at  the  same  time — simultaneous. 

Lat.  se,  apart — solve. 

Lat.  sub,  under — sojourn. 

Lat.  solus,  alone — soliloquy,  solitary. 

Lat.  sub — suspect. 

Lat.  sub — subscribe,  subterranean. 

Lat.  subter,  under — subterfuge. 

Lat.  sub — succumb,  succor. 

Lat.  sub — suffer,  suffuse. 

Lat.  sub — suggest 

Lat.  sub — support,  supposition. 

Lat.  sitper,  over — superfluous,  supernatural. 

Lat.  supra,  over,  above — supralapsarian. 

Lat,  sub — surreptitious, 

Lat,  super — surface,  survive. 

Fr.  se,  self — surrender. 

Lat,  sub — suspend,  sustain. 

Gr,  GWy  with,  together — syllable,  syllogism, 

Gr.  Gvv — symmetry,  sympathy, 

Gr,  avrv — synchronous,  synthesis, 

A.-S.  (zt,  to  or  at — twit — A.-S,  cet  witan,  to  blame. 

Eng.  Saint — tawdry.  Note. — Cheap,  showy  finery 
bought  at  the  fair  of  St.  Awdry,  held  on  St, 
Awdry's  day,  Oct.  17th,  in  the  Isle  of  Ely,  and 
other  places, 

Gr.  TO  avrOy  the  same — tautology. 

A.-S,  to,  to  or  for — to-day,  towards, 

A.-S.  to,  intensive — to-break.  Judg.  ix.,  53,  "And  a 
certain  woman  cast  a  piece  of  a  millstone  upon 
Abimelech's  head,  and  all  to  brake  his  skull,"  i.  e., 
shattered  it  :  formerly  written,  to-brake. 

I,at.  trans,  across,  beyond — trajectory,  tramontane. 

Lat.  trans — transfer,  transgress,  transit. 


Word  Making.  67 

tres-,  Old.  Fr.  ires,  Lat.  trans — trespass. 

ultra-,         Lat.  ultra,  beyond — ultramontane. 
un-,         I.  A.-S.  un,  a  negative  prefixed  to  adjectives — untrue. 

2.  A.-S.  un,  reverses  the  action  of  verbs — unbind,  un- 

dress. 

3.  A.-S,  on,  in — unless. 

4.  Goth,  und,  as  far  as — unto. 
Ut-,  A.-S.  ut,  yte,  out — utmost. 
utt-,             A.-S.  ut — uttermost. 

vice-,  Lat.  vice,  in  the  place  of — viceroy,  vice-president. 

with-,  A.-S.  with,  away  from,  against — withdraw,  withstand. 

Note. — In  common  use  with  has  now  usurped 
the  place  of  mid,  with,  no  longer  found  but  in 
midwife. 

The  terminal  particles,  or  suffixes,  are  considerably  more 
numerous,  and  present  greater  difficulties.  Of  a  great  part 
of  them  nothing  further  is  known  than  that  they  change 
nouns  into  adjectives,  or  adjectives  into  nouns,  verbs,  or  ad- 
verbs, etc.  Although  admitted  to  have  been  once  separate, 
independent  words,  they  are  often  reduced  to  single  letters, 
which  may  have  undergone  several  transformations.  Parti- 
cles, quite  distinct  in  their  origin,  assume  the  same  form, 
while  the  same  particle  may  appear  under  various  forms. 
The  termination  il-is,  of  which  the  essential  part  is  il,  recurs 
in  gent-/?,  gent-^*?/,  and  gent-?'/^/  and  et-us  furnishes  repW/^, 
6\.szx-eet,  and  secr-^/.  The  suffix  is  often  joined  to  the  radi- 
cal part  of  the  word — variously  termed  the  stem,  theme,  or 
crude  form — by  a  connecting  vowel,  usually  a,  i,  or  o.  Ge-o- 
metry  and  ge-<7-logy  are  familiar  examples  ;  but  it  is  not 
always  easy  to  determine  whether  the  intervening  vowel  be- 
longs to  the  theme  or  the  suffix,  or  is  mere  padding  inter- 
posed between  them.  Several  suffixes  are  often  added,  one 
after  another.  I  will  give  here  a  few  examples  of  the  way  in 
which  affixes — no  longer  living  words — are  strung  together 
around  a  significant  root,  reminding  us  of  a  magnet  support- 
ing a  pendulous  series  of  iron  tacks  and  filings.  The  last 
atom  seems  as  capable  as  the  first  of  attracting  and  holding 
others.     In  the  Greek  mythology  there  was  a  bevy  of  semi- 


68  The  English  Language. 

divine  blue-stockings  called  Muses.  It  was  quite  according 
to  rule  to  add  ik,  or,  as  we  should  put  it,  ic,  to  this  designa- 
tion, and  thus  make  an  adjective — of,  or  relating  to,  the 
Muses — our  English  word  music.  But  in  process  of  time 
the  Italians,  French,  and  others  seem  to  have  forgotten  that 
inus-ic  was  an  adjective,  and  to  have  taken  it  for  the  name  of 
an  art  or  branch  of  culture  ;  and  in  order  to  form  an  adjec- 
tive, added  at,  making  mus-ic-al.  Next,  the  Germans,  who 
make  a  great  deal  of  music,  added  a  third  adjective  ending, 
bringing  the  series  up  to  mus-ik-al-isch ;  and  the  requirements 
of  their  grammar  may  even  induce  them  to  say  mus-ik-al- 
isch-er.  Or  we  may  select  the  syllable  voc  as  a  starting-point. 
In  this  form  it  is  neither  noun,  adjective,  verb,  nor  adverb, 
but,  with  some  slight  additions,  may  easily  become  either. 
First  attach  to  it  the  syllable  re^  and  it  will  become  re-voc. 
If  written  revoke,  to  suit  our  peculiar  views  of  spelling,  it 
would  now  be  a  familiar  word.  Without  such  change,  we 
may  append  the  syllable  bil ;  but  re-voc-bil  would  be  too 
harsh  without  the  cushion  of  a  connecting  vowel,  and  an  a 
may  be  interposed.  We  have  now  re-voc-a-bil ;  but  again 
the  habits  of  English  spelling  require  us  to  write  so  much  of 
the  word  re-voc-a-ble.  Or  at  this  point  we  might  add  the 
suffix  tat,  which  we  should  be  obliged  to  change  to  ty.  At 
almost  any  stage  of  our  progress  the  negative  prefix  in  might 
have  been  added,  which  would  entirely  reverse  the  meaning 
of  the  word.  But  as  n  and  r  are  rather  difficult  to  utter 
together,  the  former  letter  is  assimilated  to  the  latter.  The 
whole  may  be  exhibited  thus  : 


ORIGINAL  FORMS 

ENGLISH  FORMS 

VOC 

re-voc 

revoke 

verb 

re-voc-a-bil 

re-voc-a-ble 

adjective 

ir-re-voc-a-bil 

ir-re-voc-a-ble 

adjective 

ir-re-voc-a-bil-i-tat 

ir-re-voc-a-bil-i-ty 

noun 

The  following  list  exhibits  the  principal  English  suffixes, 
but  by  no  means  their  entire  number.  The  explanations 
given  are  not  to  be  received  as  complete  definitions,  but  as 


Word  Making.  69 

illustrating  the  central  or  original  idea  of  each.  There  is 
scarcely  a  more  important  principle  in  the  formation  of 
language  than  this,  that  every  word  or  usage  is  at  first  of 
very  limited  and  obvious  application,  but  may  be  gradually 
extended,  by  virtue  of  analogies,  real  and  fanciful,  to  such 
a  variety  of  cases,  that  it  is  difificult  to  see  the  principle  that 
pervades  them  all.  This  may  be  made  clearer  by  a  familiar 
example.  The  word  post  is  remotely  derived  from  the  Latin 
pono,  to  place  or  set,  and  has  been  used  with  the  following 
significations : 

1.  A  piece  of  timber,  set  upright,  and  immovable. 

2.  A  place  where  persons  or  things  are   stationed,  as  a 
military  post. 

3.  One  of  a  series  of  stations  for  accommodating  travellers, 
and  receiving  and  delivering  goods,  letters,  etc. 

4.  The  person  in  charge  of  such  a  station. 

"  He  held  the  office  of  postmaster,  or,  as  it  was  then  called,  of 
post,  for  several  years." 

5.  A  position  of  trust  or  profit. 

**  For  neither  pension,  post,  nor  place, 
Am  I  your  humble  debtor." — Burns. 

6.  A  letter  carrier. 

7.  The   public    establishment    for    carrying    letters   and 
parcels. 

8.  A  kind  of  paper  used  for  writing  letters. 

9.  To  fasten  to  a  post  or  wall ;  to  post  bills. 

10.  To  expose  to  public  reproach. 

11.  To  assign  to  a  station. 

12.  To  transfer  accounts  to  a  ledger. 

13.  To  inform,  to  keep  one  posted. 

14.  To  put  off,  or  delay. 

15.  To  deposit  letters  in  the  post-office. 

16.  To  travel  with  the  public  conveyance  for  letters. 

17.  To  travel  rapidly. 

18.  Rapidly — adverb — as  to  travel  post  or  post-haste. 
Thus  the  word  varies  in  meaning  from  immovable  fixity 


yo  The  English  Language. 

to  rapid  motion.  Now  if  the  first  and  ninth  significations 
were  to  go  out  of  use,  there  would  be  nothing  in  the  others 
to  suggest  the  original  idea  of  an  upright  piece  of  timber. 
In  this  way  words  may  lose  all  trace  of  their  original  mean- 
ing. It  is  the  same  with  sufifixes,  of  which  one  of  the  most 
common  and  best  understood  is  ly,  which  is  most  frequently 
attached  to  adjectives  to  form  adverbs,  thus : 

He  was  walking  slow-/j/, 

She  sang  sweet-/^. 
Originally  the  particle  was,  and  meant,  like ;  and  God-ltke 
and  god-ly  are  the  same  in  origin,  although  now  differ- 
entiated. Hence  we  may  suppose  that  such  words  as  god-ly, 
king-ly,  lord-ly,  knight-ly,  were  the  earliest  adjectives  de- 
rived from  nouns.  The  process  was  next  extended  to  form 
adverbs  from  adjectives.  Yet  there  are  several  words,  as 
elderly,  goodly,  sickly,  likely,  lonely,  that  remain  adjectives 
after  the  addition  of  ly.  Comely  and  seemly  are  adjectives 
formed  from  verbs ;  and  ear-ly  is  a  double  adverbial  form. 
Holy  and  silly  are  formed  by  the  addition  oi  y  from  ig,  and 
not  ly  from  like  or  lice.  In  short,  we  cannot  reason  with  any 
certainty  as  to  what  a  word  must  necessarily  be.  Such  a 
proportion  as  : 

bring        :      brought      :  :      sing      :      sought, 
has  a  very  limited  application  in  philology. 

LIST    OF    SUFFIXES. 

-able,  Lat.  bil-is^  with  connecting  vowel  a,  adj.  from  verb 

teachable,  capable  of  being  taught. 

-ac,  Gr.  K-oi,  Lat.  c-us,  with  connecting  vowel  a,  adj.  from 

nouns. — Syriac,  elegiac,  maniac. 

-ace,       I.  Lat.  at-ium,  nouns — preface,  palace,  solace,  space. 

2.  Lat.  ax — furnace, 

3.  Fr,  ace  and  asse — terrace,  pinnace. 

-aceous,  Lat.  a-c-e-us,  double  adjectives — arenaceous,  cre- 
taceous. 

-acious,     Lat.  a-c-i-os-us,  a  double  adj.  form — tenacious. 

-acity,  Lat.  a-c-i-tat-,  turns  the  adj.  into  an  abstract  noun — 
tenacity,  loquacity,  sagacity. 


Word  Making, 


71 


■acle, 
-acular, 
-aculous, 
■acy, 


-ad, 

-ada, 

-ade, 


■age, 
■ago, 

-ain, 
■al, 


-alia, 
-ality, 

-an. 


-ance, 

-ancy, 
-and, 

-andum, 

-anda, 

-ane, 

-aneous, 

-ant, 

-ar, 
-ard, 


Lat.  a-cul-um,  nouns  from  verbs — miracle,  oracle, 
Lat.  a-cul-ar,  adds  an  adj,  termination — oracular. 
Fr.  acul-eux — miraculous. 
Gr.  an-sia^  Lat.  ac-ia,  abstract  nouns  from  adjectives 

— pharmacy,  obstinacy. 
Gr.  a?,  adoi,  nouns — dryad,  monad,  chiliad. 
Span,  ada,  past  participle — armada. 
Span,  ado,  past  participle — brocade. 
Fr.  ade — arcade,  brigade,  promenade. 
Fr.  age  from  Lat.  aticum — savage,  voyage,  passage. 
Lat.  ago,  nouns  from  other  nouns  with  the  sense  of 

like — plumbago,  like  lead  ;  virago,  like  a  man. 
Fr.  ain.  fr.  Lat.  a-n-us — captain,  fountain. 
Lat.    a-l-is,    adjectives    from    nouns, — astral,    vocal. 

Canal  was  originally  an  adjective  of  the  same 

class.     In  nouns  formed  from  verbs,  like  trial, 

proposal,  refusal,  al  is  a  modern  factitious  ending. 

In  bridal  it  stands  for  ale,  once  a  common  name 

for  a  feast, 
neuter  plural  of  the  preceding — regalia. 
Lat.  a-l-i-tat,  a.  nominal  added  to  an  adjective  ending 

— formality,  legality. 
Gr.  a~v-o?.  and  Lat.  a-n-us,  adj.  from  nouns  or  other 

adj. — Augustan,  orphan,  human,  veteran.     It  is 

often  used  to  form  adj.  from  names  of  countries. 

Persian,  Roman,  Russian. 
Lat.  anlia,  made  by  adding  the  fem.  termination  a  to 

the  present  participle — abundantia. 
the  same  as  an^e — elegancy,  repugnancy. 
Lat.  a-nd-us,  ending  of  the  future  passive  participle — 

multiplicand,  a  number  that  is  to  be  multiplied, 
the  same  as  the  preceding, 
plural  of  andum. 

the  same  as  an  in  humane,  mundane. 
Lat.  a-n-e-us,  a  double  adj.  ending — cutaneous. 
Lat.  a-n-s,  a-nt-is,  ending  of  the  present  participle, 

one  who  (does) — assistant,  occupant. 
Lat.  ar-is,  adj.  from  nouns — solar,  secular. 
Fr.  of  Old  High  German  origin,  allied  to  the  English 

hard — drunkard,  sluggard. 


72 


The  English  Language. 


-arious,      Lat.  ar-i-us,  a  double  adj.  ending — gregarious. 

-arity,         Lat.  ar-i-tat,  nouns  from  adj. — similarity. 

-arium,       the  neuter  of  the  preceding  used  as  a  noun — aquarium. 

-ary,  Lat.    ar-i-us    forms    adj.    ar-i-um,   nouns — military, 

sanctuary. 

-ast,  Gr.  aart}?^  nouns  from  verbs — encomiast,  enthusiast. 

-aster,        Ital.  astro,  from  Lat.  is-ter  in  magister,  minister,  a 
double  comparative — poetaster,  pilaster, 

-astic,         adds  the  adj.  ending  i-c  to  ast — enthusiastic. 

-ate,       I.  Lat.  a-t-us,  ending  of  the  past  passive  participle — 
ornate,  duplicate  ;  extended  to  nouns,  as  magis- 
trate ;  used  filso  as  verbs — circulate,  tabulate. 
2.  a  class  of  chemical  salts — nitrate,  sulphate. 

-bility,        Lat.  bil-i-tat,  abstract  nouns — flexibility.     See  able. 

-bund,         Lat.  bund-us — moribund. 

-ce,  A.-S.  or  early  English  s,  adverbial — once,  twice,  since. 

-cle,  Lat.  cul-us,  diminutive  nouns — article,  particle. 

-cule,  the  same  as  cle — animalcule,  reticule. 

-cund,         Lat.  c-und-us  J  adj.  having  a  tendency  to — rubicund. 

-cy,  Lat.  tia  and  Gr.  reia,  nouns — policy,  potency,  fancy. 

Some  are  formed  in  imitation  of  Fr.  in  cie  from 
Lat.  in  tia — chaplaincy,  captaincy,  conspiracy. 

-der,  denoting  the  doer — spider  for  spinther,  the  spinner. 

-do,         I.  Gr.  Scov^  nouns — teredo. 

2.  Lat.  do,  nouns,  torpedo,  uredo. 

3.  Span.  See  ado. 

-dom,  A.-S.  ddm,  judgment,  authority — kingdom,  wisdom. 

-ed.  This  termination  of  the  English  past  participle  has 

been  extended  to  a  quite  different  class  of  expres- 
sions, as  left-handed,  quick-witted,  and  other 
adjectives  denoting  possession. 

-ee,  I.  Fr.  /,  /e,  a  participle  used  as  a  noun,  one  who  does,  or 
to  whom  anything  is  done — trustee,  legatee,  com- 
mittee. Grant<?r,  one  who  grants  ;  grant^^,  one  to 
whom  anything  is  granted. 
2.  after  names  of  peoples  or  countries,  forms  adjectives 
— Bengalee,  Parsee,  Hindustanee  ;  written  also 
Bengali,  etc. 

-eel,  an  irregular  formation,  genteel,  from  Lat.  gentilis. 

gentile,  or  gentle,  belonging  to  one  of  the  [first] 
families. 


Word  Making. 


n 


-eer,  mostly  from  the  French  ier  and  aire,  a  noun  denoting 

profession  or  occupation — muleteer,  musketeer, 
mountaineer,  volunteer. 
-el,  I.  Heb.  El,  God,  in  early  Scripture  names — Israel,  Ariel. 

2.  A.-S.  <?/,  diminutive — kernel,  laurel, 
-en,         I.  A.-S.  en,  adjectives  from  names  of  materials — earthen, 
leaden,  wooden. 
2.  Old  Eng.  en  in  verbs   of   causing — fatten,   harden, 
lengthen. 
Lat.  entia,  nouns  from  pres.  part. — patience,  violence, 
same  as  the  foregoing, 
see  and. 

Lat.  innuendo,  i.e.  by  nodding  or  pointing. 
Lat.  adds  the  ending  ous  to  end — tremendous,  of  a 

nature  to  be  trembled  at. 
Lat.  e-n-us,  adj.  from  nouns — Damascene,  terrene. 
Fr,  ager — messenger,  passenger. 
Lat.,  see  ant. 

Lat.  e-us,  adj.  from  nouns — igneous,  ligneous. 
A.-S.  wis — righteous  from  rihtwis. 
A.-S.  ere,  nouns  from  verbs — lover,  writer,  robber, 
forms  a  class  of  secondary  verbs,  with  no  other  spe- 
cial characteristic  in  common — batter,  clamber 
slumber,  chatter,  whisper,  sputter. 
A.-S.  em,  adjectives — eastern,  western,  northern. 
Lat.  esc-o,  verbs  denoting  the  beginning  and  progress 

of  an  action — convalesce,  deliquesce, 
a  participial  and  adjective  form  of  the  preceding, 
the  corresponding  termination  for  a  noun. 
Fr.  is,  ois,  ais,  from  the  Lat.  ensis — Chinese,  Maltese. 
Fr.  esgue,  equal  to  the  Eng.  ish — Arabesque,   pict- 
uresque. 
Gr.  z?,  tffffa,  Lat.  issa,  Fr.  esse,  feminines — empress, 
heiress. 
-et,  Fr.  ef,  diminutive — bullet,  pallet,  pullet, 

-etta,  Ital.  effa,  diminutive — burletta. 

-ette,  Fr.,  the  same — palette,  lunette. 

•etto,  Ital.,  the  same — cavetto,  stiletto. 

-eur,  Fr.  equivalent  to  er  and  or  or  ior — amateur. 

-ey,  see^ — clayey,  skyey. 

•fare,  A.-S.  /arn,  a  journey — welfare,  homefare. 


•ence, 

-ency, 

-end, 

■endo, 

-endous, 

-ene, 
-enger, 
■ent, 
-eous,    I. 

2. 

•er,       I. 

2. 


•em, 
-esce, 

-escent, 
-escence, 
-ese, 
-esque, 


-ess 


74 


The  English  Language. 


-fer,  'LdX.fer-o,  bear,  carry — conifer,  lucifer. 

-feroiis,       the  preceding  with  ending  ous  added — auriferous. 

-fic,  Lat,  fie,  from  fac-i-o,  to  make  or  do — pacific,  terrific. 

-fice,  Lat.  fic-i-um,  a  thing  done  or  made — artifice,  edifice. 

-fill,  A.S.ful,  adj.  from  nouns — fruitful,  painful. 

-fy,  Fr.  fier,  from  Lat.  fic,  fac-i-o — fortify,  solidify. 

-gerous,  Lat.  ger-o,  to  bear  or  carry,  with  ending  ous  added — 
armigerous,  lanigerous. 

-head,         A.-S.  had,  state,  rank,  or  condition — Godhead. 

-hood,         another  form  of  the  same — childhood,  knighthood. 

-ia,  I.  Lat.  ia,  a  frequent  ending  of  the   names  of   coun- 

tries. 

2.  Lat.  ia,  neuter  plural   of   adjectives — regalia,  pene- 

tralia. 

3.  Gr.  la — ambrosia,  paronomasia.     Seej'. 
-ible,  Latin  i-bil-is.     See  able. 

-ic,  I.  Gr.  iKOi,  adjectives — conic,  graphic,  logic. 

2.  Lat.  i-c-us,  adj.  from  nouns — historic,  public — much 
employed  by  chemists  to  form  the  names  of  cer- 
tain acids. 

-ice,  I.  Gr.  iXEia^  Lat,  itia,  itium,  ities,  nouns — police,  service, 
justice,  malice,  notice. 

-ician,  Lat.  a  double  adj.  ending,  formed  of  ic  and  an  with 
connecting  vowel ;  chiefly  used  to  denote  a  pro- 
fession, as  musician,  physician. 

-icious,       Lat.  double  adjective  ending. 

-icular,       formed  from  ic,  ul,  and  ar — reticular. 

-iculate,     Lat.  composed  of  ic,  the  dim.  ul,  and  ate ;  at  first 
properly  a  participle,  but  often  used  as   a  new 
•verb. 

-iculation,  a  noun  formed  from  iculate. 

-iculous,     equivalent  to  icular — ridiculous. 

-id,  I.  QfX.Bidr)i',  SQQ  Old — orchid. 

2.  Lat.  id-US,  adjective  ending — humid,  rigid,  solid. 

-ide,  a  primary  chemical  compound — chloride,  sulphide. 

-ile,  Lat.  i-l-is,  like  a-l-is,  adjectives  from  nouns  and  verbs 

— puerile,  hostile,  fragile,  missile. 

-im,         I.  Heb.  im,  a  masc.  plur.  ending  of  Scripture  names  of 
peoples,  as  Rodanim,  Anakim. 
2.  Lat.  im,  in  adverbial  endings — interim,  verbatim. 


Word  Making.  73 

-ine,        I.  Gr.  i-v-o?,  adj. — cedrine,  petrine. 

2.  Lat.  i-n-uSy  adj.  from  nouns — aquiline,  canine.  In 
this  sense  it  terminates  four  chemical  elements, 
chlorine,  bromine,  iodine,  and  fluorine.  Also 
the  medicinally  active  principle  of  certain  plants, 
as  quinine,  santonine,  morphine. 

-ing,  I.  A.-S.  ing,  added  to  the  name  of  a  person,  like  the 
Greek  idr)?^  distinguished  his  descendants  ;  ap- 
plied next  to  the  people  of  a  particular  town  or 
district.  Towns  and  districts  were  also  named 
from  families.  The  names  Billings,  Isl-ing-ton, 
Wall-ing-ford,  Wals-ing-ham,  are  relics  of  this 
usage. 

2.  A.-S.  ing,  forms  nouns  with  something  of  the  charac- 

ter of  adjectives — hearing,  shilling,  whiting. 

3.  A.-S.  ung,  verbal  nouns — morning,  evening,  building, 

wedding,  writing,  reckoning. 

4.  In  modern  English  the  ending  of  the  present  partici- 

ple which  had  already  begun  to  supplant  the 
participial  endings  a-nde,  i-nde,  by  a.d.  1200. 
The  verbal  noun  and  the  participle,  originally 
quite  separate,  are  now  indistinguishable.  Friend 
and  j^end  are  relics  of  the  original  participle. 

-ion,  Lat.  ion-is,  forms  abstract  nouns  from  verbs — ques- 

tion, contagion,  derision,  dominion,  vision. 

-ious,  Lat.,  a  secondary  adjective  formation,  mostly  from 

adj.  ax  or  ix — audacious,  sagacious. 

-isation,     see  ize. 

-ise,  see  ize. 

-ish,        I.  terminations  of  certain  verbs  from  Fr.  verbs  in  />, 
and  Lat.  in  ire — banish,  finish,  polish,  punish. 
2.  A.-S.  isc,  forms,  i,  patronymics,  as  English,  Spanish  ; 

2,  adj.  from  nouns,  bookish,  sheepish,  waspish  ; 

3,  adj.  from  adj. — greenish,  sweetish. 

-isk,  Gr.    iffK-oiy    iGK-7],    iax-i-ov,  diminutive — asterisk, 

basilisk. 
-ism,  Gr.  iffjA-o?j  condition,  characteristic,  idiom,  doctrine, 

— barbarism,  Gallicism,  mesmerism,  Methodism, 
-ist,  Gr.  iffT-Tj? — anatomist,  organist,  florist,  spiritualist. 

-ister,  a  double  nominal  ending — barrister,  chorister. 


76  The  English  Language. 

-istic,  combination  of  ist  and  ic — linguistic,  sophistic. 

-ite,  I.  Gr.  ir^S",  designates  classes  of  persons — anchorite, 
hypocrite. 

2.  in  Scripture  forms  patronymics — Edomite,  Levite, 

3.  Lat.   i-t-us  a  termination  of  the  past  participle,  form- 

ing Eng.  adj. — contrite,  erudite. 

4.  forms  the  names  of  certain  salts — nitrite,  sulphite. 

5.  forms  names  of  minerals — Arragonite,  calcite,  selenite. 
-itious,        Lat.  i-t-i-us,  an  adj.  added  to  a  participial  ending — 

nutritious. 

-itis,  Gr.  in?,  names  for  inflammatory  diseases — arthritis, 

pleuritis,  meningitis. 

-ive,  Lat.  iv-us,  adj.  added  to  participial  ending — delusive. 

-ival,  Lat.  second  adj.  ending  added  to    the  preceding — 

estival,  festival. 

-ize,  Gr.  iZoo,  a  frequent  termination  of  derivative  verbs — 

apologize,  baptize,  symbolize.  There  are  many 
imitations,  which  some  write  with  s  and  others 
with  5,  as  humanize  or  humanise,  patronize  or 
patronise. 

-kin,  Old  Du.  ken,  diminutives — gherkin,  lambkin,  catkin, 

-ledge,  Norse  leikr,  game,  play,  occupation  ;  used  like  ness  to 
form  abstract  nouns — knowledge, 

-less,  A.-S.  leds,  loose  or  free  from — stainless,  painless  ;  not 

connected  with,  little,  less,  least, 

-let.  Old   Fr.  l-et,  a  double   diminutive — chaplet,   cutlet, 

brooklet. 

-ling,      I.  A.-S,  l-ing,  a  double  diminutive — darling,  duckling. 
2,  A,-S,  lie,  like — darkling,  sideling, 

-logy,  Gr,  Xoyoi,   word,  speech,  story,  doctrine,  often  pre- 

ceded by  a  connecting  vowel,  o  or  / — geology, 
meteorology, 

-long,  a  variant  of  ling  2, — headlong,  sidelong, 

-ly,  A.-S,  lie,  like  forms,    i,  adj,   from   nouns — friendly, 

lovely,  manly  ;  2,  adj.  from  other  adj, — goodly, 
elderly,  sickly ;  3.  adv,  from  adj.,  a  very  numer- 
ous class — nobly, 

-mancy,      Gr.  /.lavrsia,  divination — cheiromancy,  necromancy. 

-menon,  plural  mena,  Gr.  participial  ending — phenomenon, 
appearing,  that  which  appears  ;  prolegomena, 
prefatory  remarks. 


Word  Making. 


77 


-ment,         Lat.  mentum,  of  participial  origin,  forms  nouns  from 

verbs— fragment,  segment,  argument. 
■mony,        Lat.  mon-i-a,  mon-i-um — ceremony,  matrimony. 
■monious,  adds  the  adj.  ending  ous  to  the  preceding. 
-monial,     equivalent  to  monious. 

-nal,  Lat.  n-al-is^  double  adj.  ending — diurnal,  paternal. 

-ness,  A.-S.  nesse,  nes,  nis,  nys,  Gothic  nassus,  forms  abstract 

nouns  from  adjectives — goodness,  darkness,  sweet- 
ness. 
•O,  I.  Latin  o,  ablative — folio,  quarto,  octavo. 

2.  common  ending  of  nouns  and  adj.  from  Italian  or 
Spanish — alto,  solo,  studio,  embargo,  negro. 
A.-S.  uca,  diminutives — hillock,  hummock. 
Gr.  o-isdt}?,  fr.   8ido?^  form,    appearance — spheroid, 

conoid,  deltoid. 
Lat.  or,  added  to  the  stem  of  the  supine,  and  so  al- 
ways preceded  by  j  or  / ;   denotes  the  doer — act- 
or, orator,  inspector,  assessor,  confessor. 
Lat.  ortus,  oria,  orium,  nouns  and  adj.  formed  from 
supines — dilatory,  victory,   promontory,    posses- 
sory. 
Lat.  OS-US,  adj. — jocose,  lachrymose,  morose. 
Gr.  orrj?  and  corrj? — idiot,  patriot,  zealot. 
i-c  added  to  the  preceding. 

Fr.  eur  fr.  Lat.  or  (see  or)  which  is  now  restored  in 
nearly  all  words  except  Saviour. 
-OUS,  Lat.  us  and  os-us,  adj. — arduous,  devious,  pious, 

-pie,  Lat.//jV,  fold — triple,  quadruple,  multiple. 

-plicate,     \a2X.  plic-at-us,  folded — duplicate,  triplicate. 
-red,  A.-S.  rceden,  condition — hatred,  kindred  ;    originally 

kinrede  or  kinred.     The  first  d  is  interpolated  as 
it  is  in  thunder,  or  the  b  in  number. 
-ric,  A.-S.  rice,  dominion,  jurisdiction — bishopric. 

-ry,  ery  ox  y,  an  act,  trade  or  the  collective  body  of  those 

employed  in  it — cavalry,  cookery,  surgery. 
-ship,  A.-S.  scipe  from   a   verb   signifying  to   shave  or  to 

shape  and  make,  in  any  case  denoting  activity, 
duty,  labor — clerkship,  friendship,  horsemanship. 
-sis,  Gr.  Gi'i,  primarily,  the  act  of  doing  anything,  second- 

arily, the  thing  done — synopsis,  thesis. 
-some,        A.-S.  suniy  Norse  samr,  Eng.  same — fulsome,  irksome. 


-ock, 
-oid, 

-or. 


-ory, 


-ose, 
-ot, 
-otic, 
-our. 


7$  The  English  Language. 

-Ster,  A.-S.  es-tre,  signified  originally  the  doer  or  actor,  but 

became  restricted  to  females — spinster,  tapster. 

-stress,       a  second  feminine  ending  added  to  the  preceding — 
seamstress,  songstress. 

-sy,  an  Anglicised  form  of  sis — heresy,  hypocrisy. 

-ter,  Gr.  T77P,  ending  of  some  nouns — crater,  character. 

-tery,  Gr.  rrjpiov^  names  of  instruments — cautery,  psaltery. 

-th,  A.-S.  dk,  equivalent  in  force  to  ty  from  the  Lat.  tat-s, 

forms  abstract  nouns  from  adjectives  and  verbs 
— health,  truth,  worth,  birth,  stealth.  After  /,  s, 
or  gh,  th  becomes  / — theft,  thirst,  weight.  It  is 
used  also  to  form  the  ordinal  numbers  after  the 
third. 

-trix,  Lat.  t-r-ix,  a  feminine  termination  corresponding  to 

t-or — directrix,  executrix. 

-tude,  Lat.  tu-d-o,  a  double  suffix  forming  abstract  nouns 

from  adjectives,  equivalent,  therefore,  to  ness 
from  A.-S. — attitude,  solitude,  rectitude. 

-ture,  Lat,  tur-us,  ending  of  the  future   participle — future, 

adventure,  sepulture. 

-ty,          I.  Lat.  tat-s,  abstract  nouns  from  adj.,  equivalent  to  Jiess 
or  tude — equity,  liberty,  plenty. 
2.  A.-S.  tig,  meaning  ten — twenty,  thirty,  forty. 

-uble,  Lat.  u-bil-is,  see  able — soluble,  voluble. 

-ula,  ule,  ulum,  Lat.  diminutives — nebula,  pendulum. 

-ulent,         Lat.  u-lent-us,  with  the  general  sense  of  abounding 
in,  corpulent,  fraudulent,  succulent,  virulent. 

-ulcus,       Lat.  ul-uSy  nearly  the  same  in  sense  as  the  preceding 
— garrulous,  tremulous. 

-und,  Lat.  und-us — jocund,  rotund,  rubicund. 

-ure,  Lat.  ur-a,  added  to  past  participles,  forming  nouns 

— figure,  nature,  picture,  structure. 

-uret,  a  term  formerly  used  for  a  certain  chemical  com- 

pound— cyanuret,  sulphuret.     See  ide. 

-ward(s),  A.-S.  'weard{es),  denotes  direction — forward,  upward. 

-way(s),     A.-S.  meaning   road   or   direction — always,   straight- 
way. 

-wise,         A.-S.  wise,  manner — likewise,  otherwise. 

-y,  1.  Gr.  la  or  sia — antipathy,  astronomy,  irony. 

2.  Gr.  siov — mystery,  trophy. 


Word  Making. 


79 


3.  Lat.  atus — deputy. 

4.  Lat.  turn — ceremony,  remedy,  study. 

5.  Fr.  ie  from  Lat.  /a,  denotes  condition,  faculty,  etc. — 

misery,  memory,  modesty. 

6.  A,-S.  ig,  forms  adj.  from  nouns — horny,  silvery,  rainy, 

windy. 

There  are  many  other  words  ending  in  y  which  prop- 
erly fall  under  neither  of  these  heads. 

Thus  the  English  language  has  an  ample  apparatus  of 
prefixes  and  suffixes,  by  the  aid  of  which,  from  almost  any 
given  word,  a  small  family  of  derivations  may  be  developed. 
We  import  the  Latin  word  radix  (stem  radic),  for  example, 
and  from  this  we  form  : 


I. 

radic-a/ 

II. 

radic-^//^« 

2. 

ra.d\c-ally 

12. 

<?-radic— <a!/<? 

3- 

Tadic-a/tsm 

13- 

e-radic-a^ion 

4- 

radic-a/t'fy 

14. 

e-xadic-ative 

5. 

radic-a/ness 

15- 

e-rad\c-able 

6. 

radic-^/ 

16. 

e-rad\c-abt'lity 

7- 

radic-/<? 

17. 

ine-xad\c-able 

8. 

radic-a/<? 

18. 

ine-xad\c-ably 

9- 

radic-ar//? 

19. 

ir-rad\c-ate 

10. 

radic-anf 

20. 

ir-rad\c~ation 

In  forming  compound  words  of  any  kind  it  is  considered 
good  usage  to  obtain  all  the  parts  from  the  same  language. 
Words  thus  formed  have  a  neatness  and  harmony  that 
hybrids  cannot  always  attain.  Cablegram  is  an  extremely 
harsh  word  compared  with  telegram.  Incorruptibility  is 
faultless,  but  incorruptibleness  would  be  stiff  and  awkward.' 

'  We  sometimes  witness  acrobatic  feats  of  word-making,  as  in  aldehyde,  the 
first  syllable  of  which  is  Arabic,  the  second,  Latin,  the  third,  Greek  ;  or  the 
names  of  new  towns,  like  Copperopolis  and  West  Las  Animas.  The  first 
founders  of  Cincinnati  performed  a  greater  exploit  in  calling  their  embryo  city 
Losantiville.  L  was  for  Licking  Creek,  that  entered  on  the  other  side  of  the 
river  ;  os,  for  mouth,  anti,  for  opposite,  and  ville,  for  town.  The  first  part  was 
English,  if  anything  ;  the  second,  Latin  ;  the  third,  Greek  ;  the  fourth,  French. 
There  is  a  practice  growing  up  at  present,  especially  among  the  learned  in 


8o  The  English  Language. 

In  the  same  way  durability,  fatality,  voracity,  and  valor  are 
preferable  to  durableness,  fatalness,  voraciousness,  and  val- 
iantness.  Still  there  are  thousands  of  hybrid  words  fully 
established  in  use ;  and  practically  some  of  them  serve  their 
purpose  well.  This  is  especially  so  where  the  heterogeneous 
part  is  merely  a  suflfix.  We  are  quite  satisfied  with  tender- 
ness, although,  had  we  been  used  to  it,  tenerity  might  have 
seemed  a  more  elegant  word.  In  regard  to  the  largest  class 
of  suffixes,  conformity  to  the  rule  indicated  would  be  hope- 
less. We  form  adverbs  by  adding  ly  to  adjectives,  no 
matter  from  what  source  the  latter  are  derived.  But  ly  is 
Anglo-Saxon,  while  a  great  part  of  our  adjectives  are  Latin. 
The  corresponding  adverbial  terminations  in  Latin  are  e  and 
iter  ;  of  which  we  have  not  a  single  instance  in  our  language. 
We  must  perforce  say  modestly  and  morally  instead  of  modeste 
and  moraliter.  The  most  that  can  be  said  then  is  that,  so 
far  as  practicable,  words  should  be  homogeneous. 

There  is  yet  another  mode  of  developing  words,  and  that 
is  by  declension  of  nouns  and  conjugation  of  verbs.  If  in 
illustrating  this  I  occasionally  refer  to  languages  remote  and 
little  known,  it  is  not  because  they  have  always  a  special 
connection  with  English,  but  from  a  belief  that  the  growth 
of  language  has  been,  in  its  essential  features,  everywhere  the 
same,  as  resulting  from  approximately  the  same  human 
faculties  and  wants.  And  as  spoken  language  is  never  at 
rest,  but  continuously  growing  and  decaying,  like  the  trees 
of  the  wood,  a  particular  phase  of  development  wanting  in 
one  place  may  be  found  in  another.  The  principal  words  in 
any  language,  and  therefore  the  chief  subjects  of  inflexion, 
are  those  that  denote  things,  qualities,  and  actions :  in  other 

Germany,  of  fabricating  words  that  shall  be  self-explaining,  and  tell  their  owTi 
story,  however  long  it  may  take  them.  Thus  Schleicher,  in  his  "  Compendium 
of  Comparative  Grammar,"  employs  such  words  as  ariogrcecoitalokeltische.  But 
perhaps  the  most  unwieldy  combination,  since  Aristophanes  constructed  one  of 
169  letters,  is  azocaboxylbcnzolmethadimethylamidocarhoxylbenzol,  which  may  be 
found  on  page  393  of  the  "  General  Register  zum  Chemischen  Centralblatt, " 
i870-'8i.  This  may  be  good  in  chemistry,  but  is  bad  in  language.  It  is 
about  on  a  par  with  calling  a  house  a  bricklimesandtimber,  etc.,  or  naming  an 
ox  by  enumerating  every  bone  and  tissue  in  his  body. 


Word  Making.  8i 

words,  nouns,  adjectives,  and  verbs.     The  pronouns,  being 
substitutes  for  nouns,  are  here  reckoned  along  with  them. 
Inflexion  does  not  change  the  class  or  meaning  of  a  word, 
but  only  indicates  a  change  of  relation.     If  a  certain  word  is 
a  noun,  it  continues  so  ;  and  if  it  denotes  a  horse,  it  repre- 
sents that  animal   throughout,  and  no    other.     The   same 
holds  good  of  the  adjective  and  verb.     As  has  been  said 
already,  the  inflexional  system  of  English  is  meagre.     The 
Latin  words  bipenni  secatur  may  be  rendered  he  is  getting  cut 
with  an  axe,  in  which  each  word  of  the  original  is  represented 
by  at  least  three.     Roughly  speaking,  with  an  stands  for  the 
termination  i,  and  he  is  for  tur.     These  two  terminations  are 
not  known  as  words  in  Latin.     They  are  not  even  intelli- 
gible fragments  with  recognized  meanings.     They  are  mere 
forms  of  ending  of  which  the  Roman  could  give  no  more 
account  than  the  average  Englishman  can  of  the  n  in  blown. 
The  principal  transition  type  between  such  a  form  as  he  is 
cut  and  one  of  a  single  word,  as  secatur,  is  one  that  prevails 
very  widely — one  in  which  the  chief  element,  cut  for  example, 
stands  unaltered,  with  as  many  suffixes  as  may  be  necessary 
appended  one  after  another.     These  suffixes   may  be   no 
longer  in  use  as  independent  words ;  but  it  is  essential  that 
they   be   readily   recognized    and    their   meaning  perfectly 
understood.     In  that  respect  the  compound  will  be  some- 
what  like   our   word  fear-less-ness.     This,    which    is  called 
agglutination,  or  sticking  together,  is  the  characteristic  of 
the  language  of  nomads.     It  must  be  intelligible  to  many 
who  seldom  meet.     It  must  consist  of  words — like  good-for- 
nothing — that  can  be  put  together  in  an  instant  and  under- 
stood at  a  glance.     Nearly  all  the  native  languages  westward 
from  the  Wall  of  China,  and  including  in  Europe  Turkish, 
Finnish,  Magyar,  and  Basque,  are  of  this  character,  and  have 
received  the  general  appellation  of  Turanian,  from  a  word 
signifying  to  roam,  and  indicative  of  the  supposed  original 
nomadic  state  of  these  peoples.     The  following  example  of 
agglutination  has  often  been  presented,  in  one  form  or  other. 
In  Turkish,  sev  means  love ;  not  as  a  noun  or  verb,  but  the 
germ  of  either.     With  the  suffix  mek,  it  becomes  sev-mek,  to 


82 


The  English  Language, 


love.     But  a  number  of  other  suffixes  might  be  interposed, 
forming  a  long  series  of  derived  verbs : 

1.  sev-mek,  to  love. 

2.  sev-me-mek,  not  to  love. 

3.  sev-e-mek,  to  be  able  to  love. 

4.  sev-e-me-tnek,  not  to  be  able  to  love. 

5.  sev-dir-mek,  to  make  to  love. 

6.  sev-dir-me-mek,  not  to  make  to  love. 

7.  sev-dir-e-me-mek,  not  to  be  able  to  make  to  love. 

8.  sev-ish-mek,  to  love  one  another. 

9.  sev-tsh-dtr-mek,  to  cause  to  love  one  another. 

10.  sev-ish-dir-me-mek,  not  to  cause  to  love  one  another. 

11.  sev-ish-dir-e-me-mek,  not  to  be  able  to  cause  to  love  one 

another. 

The  series  might  be  continued  up  to  the  number  of  thirty 
or  more,  in  each  of  which  the  root  holds  its  place  and  is  un- 
changed, and  all  the  suffixes  are  distinct  and  intelligible. 
Each  one  of  the  series  becomes  a  new^  verb,  to  be  conjugated 
throughout  by  person,  number,  mood,  and  time.  Thus,  if 
er  be  added  to  the  primary  root  sev,  it  becomes  sev-er,  liter- 
ally lotiing.  Next  attach  the  pronoun  im,  and  we  have  sev- 
er-im,  loving  I,  or  /  love,  thus : 


PRESENT. 

PAST. 

I  St  person 

sever-im 

sever-di-m 

2d  person 

sever-sen 

sever-di-fi 

3d  person 

sever 

sever-di' 

ist  person 

sever-iz 

sever-di-k  (miz) 

2d  person 

sever-sez 

sever-di-niz 

3d  person 

sever-ler 

sever-di-ler 

Singular 


Plural 


These  suffixes  are  not  the  personal  pronouns,  as  found 
separate  but  evidently  derived  from  the  same  originals.     It 

'  The  absence  of  any  suffix  to  the  third  person  singular  is  a  feature  observed 
in  languages  having  as  little  visible  connection  as  Hebrew,  Turkish,  Hungarian, 
and  the  Basque  of  the  Pyrenees.  It  is  also  a  curious  fact  that  substantially  the 
same  particle,  di,  d,  or  /,  is  used  to  form  the  past  tense  in  Turkish,  Magyar,  and 
the  Teutonic  family  of  languages. 


Word  Making. 


83 


IS  very  rarely  that  they  are  alike.  The  verbal  suffixes 
resemble  more  closely  the  possessive  pronouns  attached  to 
nouns.  This  will  be  made  clearer  by  exhibiting  first  the 
Magyar  pronouns  alone,  and  next  combined  with  nouns  and 
verbs. 


en     I 
te      thou 

nek-em     to  me 
nek-ed     to  thee 

engem 
teged 

me 
thee 

6       he 

nek-i        to  him 

6t,  or  olet      him 

mi    we 

nek-iink  to  us 

j  minket      ) 
(benunketj     "^ 

ti      you 
ok    they 

nek-tek    to  you 
nek-ik      to  them 

titeket 
oket 

you 
them 

Nak,  or  nek,  here   =   to 

DEFINITE    FORM.                                INDEFINITE    FORM. 

kis-em 

my  knife 

var-om 

var-ok 

I  sow 

kis-ed 

thy  knife 

var-od 

var-sz 

thou  sowest 

kis-e 

his  knife 

var-ja 

var 

he  sows 

kis-iink 

our  knife 

var-juk 

var-unk 

we  sow 

kis-tek 
kis-ok 

yo 
th 

ur  knife 
eir  knife 

var-jatok 
var-jak 

var-tok 
var-nak 

ye  sow 
they  sow 

In  the  Hungarian,  or  Magyar,  another  class  of  suffixes, 
corresponding  to  what  we  call  prepositions,  may  be  placed 
after  these  pronominal  endings.  Every  suffix  may  assume 
two  forms,  as  its  vowel  may  be  changed  if  necessary  to  har- 
monize it  with  the  vowel  of  the  leading  element  of  the 
compound.     We  thus  have  : 


hdz-am-ban 

haz-ad-an 

haz-a-nal 

hdz-unk-ba 

hdz-atok-ra 

hdz-ok-haz 

hdz-am-bol 

hdz-ad-rol 

haz-a-t61 

hdz-unk-ig 

hdz-atok-^rt 


in  my  house 
on  thy  house 
at  his  house 
into  our  house 
up  to  our  house 
unto  their  house 
out  of  my  house 
down  from  thy  house 
away  from  his  house 
as  far  as  our  house 
for  your  house 


84  The  English  Language. 

hdz-ok-mal  by  means  of  their  house 

haz-am-ma  made  into  a  house  for  me 

hdz-ad-iil  for  use  as  thy  house 

The  list  might  be  extended  to  several  hundreds.  If  the 
first  vowel  were  different — an  e,  for  example — those  that 
follow  would  also  be  different.  This  change  of  letters,  by  a 
kind  of  induction — to  use  a  phrase  of  the  electricians — 
through  mere  proximity  to  other  letters — is  an  important 
part  of  grammar  to  which  it  will  be  necessary  to  recur 
again. 

In  the  foregoing  example  there  are  two  distinct  classes  of 
suffixes — fragments  of  pronouns,  and  particles  expressing 
such  relations  as  for,  in,  by,  with,  etc.  The  Aryan  languages 
use  exclusively  the  latter  class  with  their  nouns,  with  the 
single  exception  of  the  modern  Persian,  in  which  pronominal 
suffixes  are  a  late  innovation  derived  from  contact  with 
Arabs.  The  Shemitic  languages  employ  the  former  class. 
A  Sanskrit  noun  is  declined  with  three  numbers — singular, 
dual,  and  plural — and  eight  cases — the  Nominative  for  the 
doer ;  the  Vocative  for  the  person  addressed ;  Accusative, 
object  of  the  action  of  a  verb  ;  Instrumental  for  that  with 
which  anything  is  done  ;  Dative,  the  relation  to  or  for ; 
Ablative,  expressing  the  relation  from  ;  Genitive,  denoting 
possession,  and  Locative,  the  place  where.  Then  deva,  a 
god,  is  thus  declined  in  the  singular,  dual,  and  plural : 


N. 

devas 

deva-u 

deva-s 

V. 

deva 

deva-u 

devi-s 

A. 

deva-m 

deva-u 

deva-n 

I. 

deve-na 

deva-bhyam 

deva-is 

D. 

deva-ya 

deva-bhyam 

deve-bhyas 

Ab. 

deva-t 

deva-bhyam 

deve-bhyas 

G. 

deva-sya 

deva-yos 

deva-n  am 

L. 

deve 

deva-yos 

deve-shu 

It  would  be  in  vain  now  to  inquire  the  meaning  of  all 
these  endings  when  they  were  yet  separate  words,  as  they 
no  doubt  once  were.  In  Magyar  we  have  seen  them  pre- 
served with  tolerable  distinctness  ;  here  they  are  considerably 


Word  Making. 


85 


more  reduced.     A  noun  in  Hebrew  would  be  declined  upon 
an  entirely  different  principle,  thus  : 


Sus 

sus-i 

sus-cha 

sus-ech 

sus-o 

sus-ah 

sus-enu 


a  horse 

my  horse 

thy  horse  (masc.) 

thy  horse  (fem.) 

his  horse 

her  horse 

our  horse 
sus-chem    your  horse  (masc.) 
sus-chen     your  horse  (fem.) 
sus-am        their  horse  (masc.) 
sus-an        their  horse  (fem.) 


sus-im  horses 

sus-ai  my  horses 

sus-eicha  thy  horses  (masc.) 

sus-ayich  thy  horses  (fem.) 

sus-aiv  his  horses 

sus-eiha  her  horses 

sus-einu  our  horses 

sus-eichem  your  horses  (masc.) 

sus-eichen  your  horses  (fem.) 

sus-eihem  their  horses  (masc.) 

sus-eihen  their  horses  (fem.) 

As  we  have  seen,  the  Turanian  languages  use  both  classes 
of  suffixes  with  their  nouns.  All  languages  necessarily  con- 
nect personal  pronouns  with  their  verbs  ;  although  they  may 
sometimes  be  so  disguised  as  not  to  be  apparent.  The 
Shemitic  languages  have  preserved  the  pronominal  affixes 
better  than  most  others,  as  will  be  seen  by  exhibiting,  in 
Arabic  and  Hebrew:  (i)  the  personal  pronouns;  (2)  the 
prefixed,  (3)  the  suffixed,  fragments  of  the  same  ;  (4)  the 
perfect  tense,  (5)  the  imperfect,  of  the  verb  katal,  to  kill. 

The  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe  how  close  is  the  resem- 
blance between  these  two  sister  languages.  There  are  indi- 
cations that  the  Arabic  is  the  elder  of  the  two.  It  has  a 
well  preserved  dual  number,  which  has  almost  vanished 
already  from  the  Hebrew  of  the  Scriptures,  being  restricted 
to  natural  pairs,  as  the  eyes  and  ears,  and  two  or  three  words 
where  its  use  cannot  now  be  accounted  for.  The  pronouns 
of  the  1st  and  2d  persons  are  held  to  contain  a  prefixed 
demonstrative,  an  =  here  or  there — perhaps  originally  accom- 
panied by  pointing.  It  is  wanting  in  the  3d  person,  possibly 
because  the  3d  person  was  not  generally  present  to  be 
pointed  at.  The  ancient  Egyptian  had  it  throughout,  and 
the  Arabic  retains  it  in  the  2d  person,  where  it  has  been 
phonetically  reduced  to  at  in  Hebrew.  The  final  a  in  the 
3d  person  singular  has  in  Hebrew  dwindled  to  a  silent 
letter  and  at  last  disappeared. 


86 


The  English  Ijinguage. 


ARABIC. 


I 

ana 

a- 

thou  (mas.) 

anta 

t- 

thou  (fern.) 

anti 

t- 

he 

huwa 

i-  (y-) 

she 

hiya 

t- 

you  two 

antuma 

t- 

they  two  (mas.) 

huma 

i-(y-) 

they  two  (fem.) 

huna 

t- 

we 

nahnu 

n- 

you  (mas.) 

antum 

t- 

you  (fem.) 

antunna 

t- 

they  (mas.) 

j  humu  ) 
\  hum     ) 

i-  (y-) 

they  (fem.) 

hunna 

i-(y-) 

-tu 

-ta 

-ti-ina 

-a 

-at 
i  -ani      ) 
\  -tuma  ) 

■j-ani    \ 

-na 

(  -tum  ) 
\  -una  \ 
j  -tunna  ) 
l-na        \ 
j-u       ) 
(  -una  ) 


katal-tu 
katal-ta 
katal-ti 
katal-a 
katal-at 

katal-tuma 

katal-a 

katal-ata 

katal-na 

katal-tum 

katal-tunna 

katal-u 
katal-na 


a-ktul-u 

ta-ktul-u 

ta-ktul-ina 

ia-ktul-u 

ta-ktul-u 

ta-ktul-ani 

ia-ktul-ani 

ta-ktul-ani 

na-ktul-u 

ta-ktul-una 

ta-ktul-na 

ia-ktul-una 
ia-ktul-na 


The  fragments  employed  as  affixes  cannot  all  be  deduced 
from  the  existing  pronouns,  but  must  have  been  derived  from 
earlier  forms.  This  is  equally  true  of  the  suffixes  of  verbs 
in  other  languages. 

Words  may  also  be  developed  by  internal  change,  without 
the  addition  of  anything.  This  is  one  of  the  leading  charac- 
teristics of  the  Shemitic  languages.  Thus  the  Arabic  makes 
from  the  same  root : 


katala 

kattala 

katala 

aktala 

takattala 

takatala 

inkatala 

iktatala 

iktalla 

istaktala 

iktalla 


he  killed 

he  massacred 

he  tried  to  kill 

he  set  on  some  one  to  kill 

he  slew  himself 

he  pretended  to  be  killed 

he  got  himself  killed 

he  committed  suicide 

he  set  some  one  to  kill  for  him 


Word  Making. 


87 


HEBREW. 


Anokhi,  ani 

a- 

-ti 

katal-ti 

a-ktol 

attah,  atta 

t- 

-ta 

katal-ta 

ti-ktol 

atti,  at 

t- 

-t,  -i 

katal-t 

ti-ktl-i 

hu 

i-(y-) 

katal 

yi-ktol 

hi 

t- 

-ah 

katl-ah 

ti-ktol 

anakhnu, anu  ) 
nakhnu             j 

n- 

-nu 

katal-nu 

ni-ktol 

attem 

t- 

-tern,  -u 

ktal-tem 

ti-ktl-u 

atten,  attenah 

t- 

j  -ten  ) 
\  -nah  S 

ktal-ten 

ti-ktol-nah 

hem,  hemmah 

i- 

-u 

katl-u 

yi-ktl-u 

hen,  hennah 

t- 

-u,  -nah 

katl-u 

ti-ktol-nah 

Each  one  of  these  now  becomes  a  separate  verb,  to  be  con- 
jugated throughout. 

In  respect  to  signification,  we  have  in  EngHsh  a  mere 
trace  of  this  usage,  in  such  pairs  of  words  as  drink  and 
drench,  fall  and  fell,  lie  and  lay,  rise  and  raise,  sit  and  set. 
These  couplets  were  more  numerous  in  the  earlier  period  of 
the  language  than  now.  Something  apparently  similar  is 
one  of  the  marked  peculiarities  of  the  Teutonic  group  of 
languages.  It  is  the  formation  of  what  are  commonly  called 
the  irregular  verbs  which  foreigners  must  find  one  of  the 
great  difficulties  of  English.  A  few  examples  will  show  how 
hard  it  is  to  guess  the  past  from  the  present,  or  the  present 
from  the  past. 


eat 

ate 

eaten 

sing 

sang 

sung 

bring 

brought 

brought 

slay 

slew 

slain 

fly 

flew 

flown 

seethe 

sothe,  sod 

sodden 

88 


The  English  Language, 


Again,  we  have  : 

teach         taught 
buy  bought 

seek  sought 


think 
work 
bring 


thought 
wrought 
brought 


where  six  entirely  different  presents  have  almost  the  same 
past  tense. 

Although  our  language  has  little  of  declension  and  con- 
jugation now,  yet  it  was  not  always  so.  In  that  earlier  form 
known  as  Anglo-Saxon  the  inflexional  system  was  fuller 
than  in  modern  literary  German,  but  less  complete  than  in 
the  still  older  Gothic.  Thus  the  adjective  blindhdid  in  Saxon 
the  following  declension : 


MASC. 


FEM. 


NEUT. 


Singular  . 


NOM. 

blind 

•  blind-u 

blind 

Gen. 

blind-es 

blind-re 

blind-es 

Dat. 

blind-um 

blind-re 

blind-um 

Accus. 

blind-ne 

blind-e 

blind 

Instr. 

bUnd-(5 

blind-e 

NOM, 

blind-e 

bhnd-e 

blind-u 

Gen. 

blind- ra 

blind-ra 

blind-ra 

Dat, 

blind-um 

blind-um 

blind-um 

Accus. 

blind-e 

blind-e 

blind-u 

Plural 


The  change  that  such  a  word  has  undergone  consists  of 
omitting  the  terminations  entirely,  and  perhaps  altering  the 
pronunciation.  How  was  this  brought  about  ?  Evidently 
to  use  all  these  various  forms  correctly  requires  care  and  the 
skill  that  comes  of  long  and  constant  use.  Such  a  type  of 
language  could  be  developed  and  maintained  only  in  a 
closely  united  and  isolated  community.  Immigration,  con- 
quest, and  the  commingling  of  races  would  be  fatal  to  it. 
Those  who,  without  sufiflcient  knowledge,  should  attempt  to 
use  these  inflexions  would  blunder  perpetually ;  and  their 
only  safe  course  would  be  to  drop  them  altogether.  In  this 
they  would  be  determined  somewhat  by  the  place  of  the 
accent.  Some  languages,  as  the  Hebrew,  the  Greek,  and 
the  Latin,  reckon  it  from  the  end  of  the  word ;  Saxon  and 


Word  Making.  89 

Icelandic  from  the  beginning,  while  Sanskrit  and  Russian 
seem  to  have  no  preference.  The  accented  syllables  are 
longest  and  best  preserved,  while  those  farthest  from  the 
accent,  like  outlying  provinces,  are  exposed  to  waste  and 
destruction.  Now  as  the  Anglo-Saxon  generally  placed  the 
accent  near  the  beginning  of  each  word,  the  terminal  portions 
were  readily  worn  off.  It  is  known  that  this  wasting  process 
had  begun  long  before  the  Norman  conquest,  especially  in 
the  north  of  England  settled  by  the  Angles  and  exposed  to 
the  inroads  of  the  Picts  and  the  Danes.  And  when  long 
after  the  conquest  Normans  and  Saxons  united  to  form  one 
people  the  inflexional  system  was  fated  to  disappear. 

Every  student  must  be  struck  with  the  amount  of  irregu- 
larity in  all  inflected  languages.  Turn  to  the  imperfect  active 
of  the  Latin  verb  and  see  how  beautifully  regular  it  is — how 
easy  to  learn  and  to  use.  Why  cannot  all  paradigms  be  as 
plain  ?  But  as  they  are  we  encounter  at  every  step  either 
forms  so  worn  down  and  altered  as  to  be  scarcely  recogniza- 
ble, or  forms  obviously  of  different  origins.  The  words  first 
and  second  are  not  derived  from  one  and  two,  nor  are  eleven 
and  twelve  constructed  on  the  same  pattern  as  thirteen  and 
fourteen.  Better  and  worse  are  not  akin  to  good  and  bad.  In 
such  cases  we  must  suppose  the  original  native  word  to  have 
been  ousted  by  some  intruder.  Fortunately  we  know  of  at 
least  two  instances  where  that  has  been  done.  Within  the 
memory  of  living  men  mariners  very  consistently  called  the 
right  and  left  sides  of  the  ship  starboard  and  larboard,  but 
as  these  were  not  easily  distinguished  in  the  tumult  of  a 
storm, /(?r/  was  arbitrarily  substituted  for  the  latter.  Go  and 
went  are  another  mismatched  pair.  Go  had  once  a  past 
tense  which  is  well  preserved  in  the  Scotch  gaed : 

"  Then  I  gaed  hame  at  crowdie-time 
And  soon  I  made  me  ready." 

Burns: "Holy  Fair." 

Scott,  in  the  third  canto  of  "  Marmion,"  employs  a  form 
yode,  which  follows  closely  the  A.-S.  eode ;  but  as  early  as 
the  time  of   Wycliffe  and  Chaucer,  went  had   completely 


9©  The  English  Language. 

usurped  the  place  of  this  old  word.  On  the  other  hand, 
wend  is  now  scarcely  ever  used  seriously,  so  that  we  have 
only  the  present  tense  of  the  one  and  the  past  tense  of  the 
other. 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  languages  in  their  more 
primitive  stages  are  less  irregular — that,  as  change  is  inces- 
sant, irregularity  is  a  constantly  growing  quantity.  In  the 
Sanskrit  verb  we  have  found  slight  traces,  and  in  Arabic  and 
Hebrew  considerable  remains,  of  the  personal  pronouns. 
The  same  could  not  be  detected  in  the  languages  of  modern 
Europe.  This  point  may  be  illustrated  by  two  or  three  mis- 
cellaneous examples.  The  first  shall  be  the  three  series  of 
Sanskrit  adverbs,  viz.,  of  time,  place,  and  cause  or  source. 
The  first  series  corresponds  to  our  now,  then,  when,  when  f 
always. 


adhuna 

tadd 

yada 

kada 

sarvada 

atra 

tatra 

yatra 

kutra 

sarvatra 

atah 

tatah 

yatah 

kutah 

sarvatah 

Yet  notwithstanding  this  remarkable  uniformity,  one  anom- 
aly has  crept  into  each  line.  Again,  the  English  personal 
pronouns,  ist,  /,  2d,  thou,  3d,  he,  she,  or  it,  have  no  simi- 
larity ;  and  the  plurals  are  not  in  the  least  like  each  other  or 
like  their  singulars. 

It  is  quite  otherwise  in  the  language  of  the  Dakota  Indians : 

ish  he  ish-pi  they 

n-ish       thou  n-ish-pi      ye 

m-ish      /  unk-ish     we  two  m-ish-pi      we 

They  have  a  possessive  pronoun  from  a  different  root,  but 
equally  regular  in  itself : 


tawa 

tawa-pi 

ni-tawa 

ni-tawa-pi 

mi-tawa 

unki-tawa 

mi-tawa-pi 

In  the  language  of  the   Hidatsas,   an  allied  tribe,  these 
pronouns  are : 


Word  Making.  91 


hi-do 

they 

di-do 

ye 

mi-do 

we 

i  he 

d-i  thou 

m-i         I 


It  is  a  curious  fact  that  in  many  languages,  the  most 
diverse  geographically  and  in  character,  the  forms  for  the 
third  person  are  simpler  than  any  of  the  others. 

Finally  there  are  words  that  are  mere  mistakes.  Of  these 
there  are  two  kinds.  One  class,  relating  chiefly  to  animals 
and  plants,  are  errors  of  fact — ignorance  of  natural  history. 
Toads  do  not  sit  on  toad-stools  any  more  than  they  carry 
jewels  in  their  heads.  The  cuckoo  does  not  expectorate 
cuckoo-spit,  nor  do  the  stars  drop  star-Jelly.  The  other  class 
are  merely  verbal  errors,  due  to  catching  at  the  sound  of 
strange  words  and  turning  them  into  something  familiar  in 
sound  but  different  in  sense.  Thus  there  is  a  parish  in 
Derbyshire  called  Sandy  Acre — originally  Saint  Diacre ;  and 
in  Oxfordshire  there  is  Shotover  Hill  (French,  Chateau  vert), 
and  ever-ready  tradition  tells  how  Robin  Hood's  lieutenant, 
Little  John  (so-called  from  his  great  stature),  shot  an  arrow 
over  it.  The  English  sailors  used  to  call  the  ship  of  war 
Bellerophon,  Bully  Ruffian ;  as  the  soldiers  pronounced  the 
name  of  Surajah  Dowlah,  Sir  Roger  Dowley.  I  suspect  that 
Cinderella's  glass  slipper  is  a  mistake  of  a  word,  for  a  glass 
slipper  is  too  absurd  even  for  a  nursery  tale.  But  let  us 
suppose  that  the  story  took  its  present  form  in  France  about 
the  thirteenth  century,  when  vair  was  a  common  name  for 
gray  fur  or  anything  trimmed  therewith.  Suppose  further 
the  ill-used  maiden  had  furred  slippers — des pantoufles  de  vair 
— and  that  ages  after,  when  the  word  was  no  longer  in  com- 
mon use,  they  were  mistaken  for  des  pantoufles  de  verre — 
slippers  of  glass.  Legends,  mythology,  and  superstitions  owe 
much  to  a  misapprehension  of  words.  The  following  are 
some  of  the  principal  English  words  originating  in  this 
manner : 

Alewives  (from  aloof,  an  Indian  name  for  the  fish)  are  not 
married,  and  confine  themselves  to  cold  water. 


92  The  English  Language. 

"  When  the  ground  is  bad  and  worn-out,  the  Indians  used  to 
put  two  or  three  of  the  fishes  called  Aloof es  under  or  adjacent  to 
each  Corn  Hill,  where  they  had  many  a  Crop  double  to  what  the 
Ground  would  have  otherwise  produced." 

Philos.  Trans.,  London,  1700,  xii.,  1665. 

Belly-bone,  or  belly-bound,  a  variety  of  pear,  Fr.  belle  et 
bonne. 

Benjamin,  benzoin,  a  gum. 

Blue  Peter,  blue  repeater,  a  marine  signal  flag. 

Charter  House  (Fr.  Chartreuse^,  a.  Carthusian  monastery  in 
London  converted  into  a  charity  school  and  asylum. 

Condog;,  a  ridiculous  word  for  concur,  on  the  basis  that  a  cur 
is  a  dog. 

Country-dance,  for  contra-dance. 

Cow-itch  is  a  corruption  of  an  Eastern  word  which  as  a  word 
has  no  connection  with  either  cow  or  itch. 

Crawfish  is  not  a  fish.  Tracing  backwards  we  have  crawfish, 
crayfish.     Fr.  /crevtsse  ;  Ger.  Krebis  or  Krebs,  a  crab. 

Cudbear,  a  purple  dye  introduced  by  Dr.  Cuthbert  Gordon. 

Demijohn,  Half  John ;  Fr.  Dame  Jeanne,  Lady  Jane  ;  said 
to  be  named  after  the  place  of  its  invention,  Damaghan  in  Central 
Asia. 

Dear  me,  not  a  simple  expression  of  self-love,  but  the  Italian 
Dio  mio.  My  God. 

Fiddle-wood,  Yr.fidUe,  faithful,  for  its  durability. 

Fistinut,  pistachio  nut ;  Arab,  fustak. 

Godown,  y[.2Xz.y  godong,  a  warehouse. 

Gooseberry,  gorseberry,  has  no  connection  with  geese. 

Hammercloth,  a  hybrid  Dutch  and  English  word  meaning  a 
covering  cloth. 

Handsaw,  heronshaw,  "  Hamlet,"  Act  ii.,  Sc.  2. 

Ising^lass,  Dutch  huizenblas,  sturgeon's  air-bladder. 

Jerusalem  artichoke  has  no  connection  with  the  holy  city — 
Ital.  girarsole,  turning  to  the  sun. 

John  Dory,  Yr.Jaune  dorie,  a  gold-colored  fish. 

Johnny-cake.  Nothing  but  the  cake  is  now  known  of  this 
particular  Johnny.  The  early  settlers  of  Pennsylvania  and 
Virginia  used  to  prepare  journey-cake  to  take  with  them  when 
going  a  great  distance. 


Word  Making:  93 

Maul-stick,  Get.  Mahlstock,  Is  not  a  stick  to  maul  with,  but  to 
support  the  hand  in  painting. 

Niger  auger,  low  for  Nicaragua  logwood. 

Nightmare.  The  incubus  here  is  not  the  female  of  the 
horse  but  A.-S.  mara,  oppression  in  sleep. 

No-cake, — worse  fare  than  Johnny-cake,  only  a  kind  of 
porridge,  Indian  nookhik. 

Rosemary,  not  a  rose  or  specially  pertaining  to  Mary,  but 
rather  ros  marinus,  sea  dew. 

Rotten  Row  in  London  is  not  especially  a  scene  of  decay  or 
decomposition,  but  a  celebrated  thoroughfare  in  Hyde  Park, 
where  people  of  wealth  and  fashion  disport  on  foot  and  on  horse- 
back.    Long  ago  it  was  le  route  du  rot,  the  king's  route,  or  road. 

Saunders  blue,  Fr.  cendres  bleues,  blue  ashes. 

Shuttlecock,  originally  a  piece  of  ^^r^  batted  to  and  fro. 

Sirloin  for  surloin,  a  misspelling  backed  by  a  silly  story  that 
James  I.  conferred  knighthood  on  a  roast  of  beef. 

Summerset,  somerset,  somersault.  Fr.  soubresaut,  soubresault^ 
Ital.  sopra  salto,  Lat.  supra  and  saltus,  a  leap  over. 

Sparrow-grass,  asparagus. 

Stave's-acre,  Gr.  aracpii  aypia,  wild  grape. 

Tennant-saw  for  tenon-saw. 

W^ormwood  has  nothing  to  do  with  either  worms  or  wood. 
It  is  from  the  A.-S.  wer-mod,  the  name  of  the  plant  absin- 
thium. 

Yellow-hammer  is  not  a  hammer,  and  in  Europe  is  not  even 
a  woodpecker  but  a  small  bird,  the  yellow  bunting.  Ger.  Gelb- 
ammer  or  Gold-ammer. 


CHAPTER  y. 
THE  ALPHABET. 

The  invention  of  an  alphabet  to  represent  the  single 
sounds  of  vocal  speech  requires  such  a  power  of  analysis 
that  it  is  doubtful  if  it  has  ever  been  accomplished  but  once 
in  the  whole  history  of  mankind,  and  then  only  by  the  labors 
of  many  ages  and  diverse  peoples.  Like  everything  great,  it 
is  the  product  of  slow  development  and  not  of  sudden  crea- 
tion. The  man  who  had  no  hint  of  an  alphabet  could  not 
devise  it ;  and  he  who  had  once  seen  one  could  produce  only 
an  imitation. 

The  first  attempts  at  recording  were  undoubtedly  pictures, 
and  were  confined  to  no  race  or  country.  Yet  picture  writ- 
ing and  monumental  markings  had  certain  centres  of  special 
interest,  of  which  the  most  important  were  Mexico,  (includ- 
ing Central  America),  China,  Babylon,  and  Egypt.  The 
American  art  was  cut  off  before  maturity,  the  greater  part 
of  its  monuments  destroyed,  and  no  key  left  to  the  myste- 
ries of  the  remainder.  The  three  other  systems  yielded  very 
notable  results. 

The  attempt  to  convey  intelligence  by  pictures  soon  dis- 
closes the  imperfections  of  the  medium.  It  is  bulky  and  la- 
borious— requires  too  much  time  and  space  to  say  a  little. 
This  may  be  obviated  in  part  by  abridging  and  abbreviating. 
A  few  footprints  may  represent  a  journey  ;  a  sword  or  a 
handful  of  arrows,  war ;  a  ladder  leaned  against  a  wall,  a 
siege  ;  or  the  head  and  horns  of  a  deer  may  stand  for  the 
whole  animal.  Again,  no  picture  tells  its  own  story,  but 
must  be  supplemented  by  other  knowledge.  The  most  per- 
fect painting  of  the  Last  Supper  or  the  death  of  Socrates 
would  be  unintelligible  to  one  who  was  not  familiar  with  the 
story.     Admitting  that  a  wall  and  ladder  may  represent  a 

94 


The  Alphabet  95 

siege,  they  cannot  alone  tell  us  what  siege,  and  still  less  its 
cause,  history,  and  results.  For  this  purpose  a  secondary  set 
of  figures,  often  quite  arbitrary  in  form,  must  be  added  as 
keys,  headings,  inscriptions,  or  letter-press  ;  and  these  latter 
may  ultimately  be  so  perfected  as  to  dispense  with  the  pic- 
tures altogether. 

Pictures,  too,  can  represent  only  visible  objects,  and  not 
abstract  ideas.  How  can  a  picture  be  designed  that  will 
convey  to  every  beholder  the  sentiment,  "  Love  thy  neigh- 
bor as  thyself "  ?  A  rude  attempt  is  made  to  solve  this 
problem  by  means  of  that  exhaustless  fancy  that  sees  a  figu- 
rative or  symbolical  meaning  in  everything — a  metaphorical 
likeness  in  things  the  most  unlike.  A  pair  of  scales  might 
indicate  justice  ;  wisdom  might  be  represented  by  the  head 
of  an  owl ;  cunning,  by  a  fox  ;  and  the  act  of  forgetting,  by 
a  sieve  that  retains  no  water.  Among  the  Egyptians  an 
ostrich  feather  was  the  symbol  of  justice,  from  a  belief  that 
all  the  feathers  of  that  bird  are  of  equal  length  ;  a  bee  was 
the  emblem  of  royal  authority,  as  bees  were  supposed  to  live 
under  a  perfect  monarchy  ;  and  a  roll  of  papyrus  aptly  rep- 
resented knowledge. 

The  Mexicans  painted  a  serpent  with  head  and  tail  joined 
for  eternity,  and  also  for  the  divine  power ;  while  the  plain 
practical  Chinese  drew  a  pair  of  clam  shells  for  friendship, 
and  for  the  conjunction  and,  a  bunch  of  roots  ^(??<;z^  together. 

But  there  are  cases  where  all  such  contrivances  fail.  For 
names,  especially  of  foreign  persons  or  places,  mere  sounds 
must  be  expressed.  Every  system  of  writing  must  perform 
this  feat  or  utterly  fail.  So  far  as  I  am  aware  all  attempts 
to  do  this  have  been  essentially  the  same  in  principle,  which 
is  that  of  the  rebus,  so  common  in  popular  publications  for 
the  young.  A  group  or  series  of  objects  is  depicted  whose 
united  names  give  the  required  articulations.  Such  names 
as  those  of  the  Indian  chiefs,  Cornstalk,  Black  Hawk,  Red 
Cloud,  Sitting  Bull,  present  no  difficulty  ;  but  it  would  some- 
times be  necessary  to  use  only  parts  of  words,  as  it  will 
generally  be  possible  to  find  some  word  either  beginning  or 
ending  with  any  desired  sound.     In  this  way  the  Mexicans 


96 


The  English  Language. 


expressed  the  name  of  their  king  Itzcoatl  by  an  arrow  pointed 
with  obsidian,  itztli,  a  water  jar,  comitl,  and  a  symbol  for 
water,  atl.  By  combining  the  initial  syllables,  they  formed 
the  name  required.  The  Chinese  and  Assyrians  varied  this 
method  by  combining  the  initial  syllable  of  the  first  word 
with  the  final  syllable  of  the  last. 

Many  peoples  have  claimed  for  their  arts  and  institutions 
a  divine  origin  or  a  fabulous  antiquity ;  and  remote  dates  in 
general  are  to  be  accepted  only  as  approximations.  The 
Chinese  assign  a  date  of  —  2278  (2278  before  the  Christian 
era)  to  a  rock  inscription  of  one  of  their  early  kings  record- 
ing the  completion  of  an  outlet  for  the  floods  of  the 
Hoang-ho.  However  uncertain,  the  date  is  not  in  itself 
improbable.  Like  every  other  people,  they  began  with  rude 
outlines  of  objects,  which  have  been  altered  and  abbreviated 
so  many  times  that  little  of  the  original  likeness  is  left.  An 
obvious  resemblance  can  sometimes  be  traced  in  the  oldest 
texts,  which  is  lost  in  the  modern  characters,  as.  will  be  seen 
by  a  few  examples  : 

0    the  sun  ^ 

H    the  moon  ^ 


i 


|1)    mountains 


(^ 


7k 


a  fish 


a  tree 


5S 


^   a  child 
/v     a  man 


ri  the  eye 
j^  rain 

^  to  shoot 


We  have  already  seen  that  all  languages  began  with 
monosyllables,  and  that  the  Chinese  never  advanced  beyond 
that  stage.  This  perpetual  fixity  is  perhaps  due  to  the  fact 
that  it  was  committed  to  writing  in  that  primitive  form,  and 
so  remains  a  conspicuous  example  of  arrested  development. 
Every  word  at  first  was  a  little  picture,  representing  at  once 
a  visible  object  and  a  spoken  monosyllable.    As  the  language 

'  Three  mountains  piled  upon  each  other  with  trees  on  the  top. 


The  Alphabet.  197 

has  no  grammatical  distinctions,  the  same  figure,  as  noun, 
adjective,  and  verb,  represented  an  object,  its  most  conspic- 
uous quaHty,  or  its  most  characteristic  action,  as  the  case 
might  require.  By  an  extensive  system  of  secondary  and 
metaphorical  significations,  all  the  purposes  of  more  artistic 
languages  are  attained  in  a  manner  that,  though  bald  and 
stiff  is  perfectly  intelligible.  As  the  written  characters  are 
ideographic,  like  the  signs  in  our  almanacs  and  mathematical 
books,  they  convey  their  meaning  directly  in  all  parts  of  the 
empire,  whatever  may  be  the  spoken  dialect.  The  Chinese 
are  so  wedded  to  their  system  that  they  not  only  have  never 
invented  or  adopted  an  alphabet,  but  they  find  it  difficult  to 
conceive  how  other  nations  can  fill  libraries  with  some  two 
dozen  letters  not  one  of  which  means  anything. 

But  the  number  of  pronounceable  monosyllables  is  limited. 
Chinese  has  450 — some  rate  them  as  high  as  500.  Each 
spoken  word  therefore  stands  on  an  average  for  100  quite 
separate  ideas.  The  written  characters  far  outnumber  the 
uttered  sounds ;  and  in  discourse  at  all  important  or  recon- 
dite the  tongue  must  be  aided  by  the  hand  and  pencil.  The 
Chinese  grammarians  divide  their  written  words  into  the  fol- 
lowing classes  : 

First.  There  are  600  characters  so  pictorial  as  to  need  no 
explanation. 

Second.  Characters  that  vary  in  meaning  according  to 
position,  as  the  figure  of  the  sun  above  or  below  a  horizontal 
bar,  distinguishing  dawn  from  sunset. 

Third.  There  are  some  700  compound  characters  originally 
made  up  of  two  or  more. 

The  fourth  class  numbers  372  which  change  their  significa- 
tion when  either  the  form  or  the  sound  is  inverted. 

The  fifth  class  comprises  6cxd  that  are  used  in  metaphorical 
senses. 

But  as  all  these  elaborate  devices  must  fail  in  the  end,  the 
Chinese  had  recourse  to  an  ingenious  system.  They  under- 
took to  distribute  all  possible  conceptions  into  2 14  classes. 
Each  of  these  divisions  is  distinguished  by  a  character  taken, 

with  few  exceptions,  from  the  class  first  above  mentioned. 
7 


98  The  English  Language. 

These  characters,  when  so  used,  are  called  keys,  and  are  not 
pronounced.  They  are  combined  with  characters  repre- 
senting the  450  monosyllabic  sounds,  and  show  in  what  sense 
these  latter  are  to  be  understood.  Thus  the  character  to  be 
pronounced  pe,  combined  with  the  key-word  muh,  meaning 
wood  or  tree,  to  distinguish  it  from  every  other  pe,  is  pro- 
nounced merely  pe  and  not  pe  muh,  and  is  then  understood 
to  mean  a  wooden  spoon.  The  word  ngo,  united  with  27 
different  keys,  represents  as  many  wholly  dissimilar  ideas, 
but  still  pronounced  the  same.  In  this  way  the  written  is 
vastly  more  copious  and  precise  than  the  spoken  language, 
which  haa,  as  a  substitute,  a  very  inadequate  system  of  tones 
that  give  it  a  sing-song  character. 

About  the  year  39 — contemporary  with  the  preaching  of 
Saint  Paul  in  the  West — Buddhist  missionaries  from  India 
first  entered  China,  bringing  with  them  the  Devanagari 
alphabet  and  some  of  their  religious  books.  Their  teachings 
exerted  a  wide  influence,  and  by  the  end  of  the  fifth  century 
it  was  computed  that  more  than  5,000  of  their  books  had 
been  translated  into  Chinese.  The  foreign  alphabet  never 
superseded  the  native  mode  of  writing,  yet  for  certain  pur- 
poses it  was  imitated.  For  expressing  foreign  names  and 
unfamiliar  words  36  characters  were  selected,  representing 
the  initial  consonants  of  the  language,  and  38  others  for  the 
final  sounds.  One  of  the  former  followed  by  one  of  the 
latter  will  form  a  word  beginning  with  the  one  and  ending 
with  the  other.  This  system  has  been  in  use  in  dictionaries 
since  the  year  543. 

Intimate  relations  existed  from  an  early  period  between 
China  and  Corea ;  and  thither  the  Buddhist  missionaries 
penetrated  in  the  fourth  century.  As  they  were  not  there 
confronted  with  a  system  of  writing  so  deeply  rooted  as  in 
China,  the  Coreans,  profiting  by  their  example,  constructed 
an  ingenious  and  very  simple  alphabet  of  27  letters, 
adapted  to  the  sounds  of  their  language.  It  is  important 
to  observe  that  this  alphabet  has  not  the  slightest  resem- 
blance to  the  one  that  suggested  it,  but  rather  reminds  us  of 
modern  short-hand.     All  that  an  ingenious  people  require  is 


The  Alphabet.  99 

to  see  and  understand  that  vocal  speech  can  be  resolved 
into  its  elements  and  then  represented  by  visible  symbols. 
All  European  alphabets  are  unquestionably  derivations  of 
the  earliest  Phoenician,  but  the  liveliest  imagination  cannot 
detect  a  resemblance  in  more  than  two  or  three  of  the  letters 
used  by  us ;  and  that  resemblance  is  wanting  in  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Arabic,  which  are  next  of  kin  to  the  original.  One 
set  of  symbols  may  be  derived  from  another,  and  yet  the 
two  may  look  wholly  unlike,  as  our  stenographic  and  common 
printed  characters. 

The  Japanese  learned  Chinese  through  the  medium  of 
Corea.  The  sovereign  of  Japan,  having  learned  that  an  art 
of  writing  was  known  there,  sent  an  embassy  in  285  and 
brought  a  Chinese  professor  with  books  and  writing  materials 
from  Corea.  Those  apt  and  ingenuous  islanders  learned 
readily,  and  in  later  ages  honored  the  memory  of  their 
teacher  as  of  an  apostle  and  tutelary  saint.  What  they 
learned,  however,  was  the  Chinese  language  and  mode  of 
writing.  Some  centuries  later,  when  intercourse  with  China 
became  more  common,  discrepancies  were  discovered  that 
had  been  at  first  unobserved.  The  language  they  had 
learned  was  getting  obsolete.  Their  pronunciation  was 
peculiar.  The  Chinese,  for  example,  could  pronounce  no  r ; 
the  Japanese,  no  /.  The  one  people  employed  many  nasals; 
the  other,  none.  Hence  mutual  understanding  was  not 
easy.  At  the  same  time,  to  express  their  own  language  in 
Chinese  characters  was  impracticable.  They  were  thus 
driven  to  attempt  an  analysis  of  their  speech,  and  resolved 
it  into  47  elementary  syllables.  They  represented  each  by  a 
single  character — Chinese  much  simplified, — some  of  which 
were  modified  by  diacritic  points,  making  73  in  all.  This 
syllabary  was  devised  in  the  eighth  century  by  a  Buddhist 
priest,  a  native  of  Japan,  who  had  spent  many  years  in 
China,  and  was  acquainted  with  the  Devanagari  character. 
He  too  became  a  justly  canonized  saint.  His  system  is 
known  by  the  name  of  Catacanna,  and  is  really  very  simple 
and  practical.  Thus  neither  the  Corean  alphabet  nor  the 
Japanese  syllabary  was  a  purely  original  invention.     Both 


lOO  The  English  Language. 

were  due  to  the  influence  of  Buddhists  acquainted  with  a 
real  alphabet. 

What,  then,  and  whence  was  this  real  alphabet — the  De- 
vanagari  ?  It  is  the  especial  alphabet  of  the  Sanskrit  lan- 
guage. The  name  signifies,  pertaining  to  the  city  of  the 
gods — the  holy  city — that  is,  Benares.  It  might  therefore  be 
called  the  Benares  alphabet,  to  distinguish  it  from  many 
others.  It  has  contained  at  different  times  from  45  to  50 
letters,  which  we  may  suppose  to  have  represented  perfectly 
the  sounds  of  the  spoken  language  :  but  its  aspirated  letters 
and  duplicate  series  of  consonants  are  dif^cult  for  a  European 
to  distinguish.  It  has  not  the  slightest  trace  of  having  been 
derived  from  pictures  or  hieroglyphics.  The  oldest  charac- 
ters, occurring  on  monuments  and  coins,  are  simple  ;  but,  as 
now  found  in  books  the  letters  have  the  appearance  of  being 
devised  to  make  reading  and  writing  as  difficult  as  possible. 
But  as  a  means  of  preserving  literary  compositions  they  are 
not  of  great  antiquity.  We  read  in  Exodus  xxiv.,  7,  that 
Moses  *'  took  the  book  of  the  covenant  and  read  in  the 
audience  of  the  people  "  ;  and  Job  xix.,  23,  "  Oh  that  my 
words  were  now  written  !  Oh  that  they  were  printed  (?)  in 
a  book  ;  that  they  were  graven  with  an  iron  pen,  and  with 
lead  in  the  rock  forever ! "  It  is  clear  that  the  authors  of 
these  passages  were  familiar  with  the  art  of  writing,  both  lit- 
erary and  monumental;  but  in  all  the  1,017  hymns  of  the 
Rig  Veda,  which  may  reach  a  date  as  low  as  —  800,  there 
is  no  allusion  to  writing  or  writing  materials.  The  Greek 
historian  Megasthenes,  who,  as  minister  of  Seleucus  Nicator, 
spent  eight  years  at  the  court  of  Chandragupta,  King  of  Ma- 
gadha  or  Behar,  reported  that  the  Indians  were  ignorant  of 
letters,  and  preserved  their  laws  by  memory,  but  set  up  in- 
scribed milestones  along  their  roads.  Nearchus,  the  admiral 
of  Alexander's  fleet,  declared  that  they  wrote  letters 
{iTtiaroXai)  on  cotton  well  beaten  together — that  is,  on  cot- 
ton paper ;  but  he  also  admitted  that  their  laws  were  un- 
written. Unless  there  be  a  contradiction  between  two 
perfectly  competent  witnesses,  the  Indians,  by  the  time  of 
Alexander  —  327,  had  learned  some  art  of  writing,  and  used 


The  Alphabet.  loi 

it  for  inscriptions  but  not  for  literary  compositions.  Such  a 
state  of  things  would  be  curiously  paralleled  by  the  case  of 
our  Teutonic  ancestors  who  employed  their  runic  characters 
for  inscriptions,  charms,  and  secret  messages,  but  not  to  pre- 
serve their  laws,  songs,  or  sagas.  The  oldest  extant  speci- 
mens of  writing  in  India  are  the  rock  and  pillar  inscriptions 
of  King  Asoka,  the  grandson  of  Chandragupta,  and  great 
patron  of  Buddhism,  about  —  250.  They  are  in  two  dif- 
ferent alphabets,  the  early  Devanagari,  written  like  ours 
from  left  to  right ;  the  other,  a  Semitic  alphabet,  then  in  use 
in  the  northern  provinces  of  India,  and  written  from  right  to 
left.  How  the  Devanagari  came  into  existence  alongside  of 
the  other  cannot  now  be  proved,  but  to  suppose  that  it 
sprang  into  full-blown  existence  at  once,  without  leaving  a 
trace  of  development,  is  contrary  to  all  analogy.  It  is  more 
natural  to  suppose  that  it  was  an  improvement  on  the  hint 
furnished  by  an  imported  pattern.  As  has  been  already 
urged,  such  an  imitation  would  not  necessarily  have  much 
resemblance  to  the  original.*  In  a  canonical  life  of  the 
Buddha,  which  must  be  old  as  —  250,  it  is  related  how  the 
young  prince  is  sent  to  school  and  asks  his  teacher  what 
writing  he  is  to  learn.  The  pedagogue  enumerates  64  alpha- 
bets or  styles  of  writing,  and  among  them  the  Deva,  or  De- 
vanagari, which  last  is  the  one  studied.  It  is  thus  a  curious 
circumstance  that,  while  the  Brahmans  imprecated  the  direst 
curses  on  one  who  should  convey  or  acquire  their  doctrines 
through  a  written  medium,  Buddhists  carried  everywhere  the 
knowledge  of  letters.  A  Buddhist  book  is  the  first  in  the 
remote  East  to  mention  writing  as  a  part  of  education,  and 

'  A  striking  example  of  an  elaborate  system  developed  out  of  a  mere  hint  is 
the  syllabary  invented  in  1824  for  the  Cherokees  by  the  half-breed  Sequoia, 
otherwise  called  George  Guest.  He  was  in  possession  of  English  books,  but 
had  never  learned  to  read  them,  and  he  devised  a  scheme  of  84  characters,  to 
lepresent  all  the  single  syllables  of  the  language.  In  form  they  were  as  far  as 
practicable  imitations  and  modifications  of  the  English  capital  letters  and 
numerals.  Nearly  every  syllable  began  with  a  single  consonant  and  ended  with 
a  vowel  ;  and  they  were  arranged  in  the  manner  of  ba,  be,  bi,  bo,  bu.  The 
scheme  is  still  considered  well  adapted  to  the  Cherokee,  but  is  not  equally  suited 
to  other  Indian  tongues. 


I02  The  English  Language. 

a  Buddhist  prince  leaves  the  earliest  specimens  of  the  art. 
Was  there  a  Western  impulse  at  the  bottom  of  it  all  ?  In 
view  of  the  perplexing  coincidences  of  Buddhism  and 
Christianity,  the  question  might  be  asked :  Was  it  some 
stranger  from  Western  Asia — perchance  some  wandering 
Jew — that  first  stirred  the  soul  of  Siddharta  Gotama  ?  and 
did  Buddhism,  after  seven  centuries,  react  upon  the  early 
types  of  Christianity  ? 

Among  the  earliest  seats  of  civilization  was  the  rich  allu- 
vial plain  at  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  where  wheat  and 
barley  grew  wild  beneath  the  shade  of  the  date-palm,  and 
yielded  the  cultivator  two-hundred-fold.  Two  distinct  peo- 
ples occupied  those  sea  marshes  and  river  bottoms.  The 
one  was  the  so-called  race  of  Shem,  that  overspread  Arabia 
and  all  the  plain  of  the  two  rivers — the  ancient  Aram 
Naharaiim — as  far  as  the  highlands  of  Assyria  and  the 
mountains  of  Armenia.  But  earlier  than  they  were  the 
people  who  bore  the  generic  name  of  Accad,  who  seem  to 
have  descended  from  the  mountains  of  Susiana,  on  the  east. 
From  the  exhumed  relics  of  their  ancient  cities,  the  language 
and  character  of  this  people  are  now  known  in  part.  Their 
language  was  allied  in  general  structure  to  those  of  the 
Turks,  Tartars,  and  Magyars ;  and  special  affinities  have 
been  suggested  between  them  and  the  Finns  of  Northern 
Europe.  But  structural  resemblance  of  language,  when 
of  a  low  and  simple  type,  does  not  prove  affinity  of  blood, 
but  only  a  particular  stage  of  development. 

On  those  fertile  plains  were  cities  of  the  hoariest  antiquity. 
There  was  that  "  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,"  whence  Abraham — 
and  doubtless  other  enterprising  young  men — "  moved  west," 
seeking  homes  less  crowded,  and  wider  freedom.  There  were 
the  Erech  and  Calneh  of  Genesis,  and  others  less  known, 
and,  at  a  later  date,  the  mightier  Babylon,  "  the  glory  of  the 
Chaldees'  excellency.' 

From  a  date  that  can  scarcely  be  guessed  at,  the  Accad 
had  a  peculiar  art  of  writing.  The  extant  remains  show 
mere  traces  of  derivation  from  pictures  or  hieroglyphs,  but 
in  general   the   appearance   is   that   of   perfectly  arbitrary 


The  Alphabet,  103 

marks.  Specimens,  regarded  as  especially  archaic,  exhibit 
combinations  of  straight  strokes,  but  by  far  the  most  common 
are  groups  of  six  to  a  dozen  slender  isosceles  triangles,  like 
wedges  or  spear-points,  whence  the  writing  has  received  the 
name  of  cuneiform  or  arrow-headed.  If  there  were  any  docu- 
ments of  fragile  material,  they  have  perished,  and  only  stone, 
burnt  clay,  and  metal  remain.  From  Babylon  downward  to 
the  sea  stone  was  scarce,  and  the  use  of  brick  universal.  The 
singular  expedient  was  adopted  of  impressing  words  upon 
plastic  clay  with  the  end  of  a  slender  three-sided  stick.  The 
clay  was  then  dried  and  baked,  usually  in  the  form  of  bricks, 
tablets,  or  cylinders.  Bricks  were  often  printed  on  all  sides ; 
a  tablet  might  contain  several  hundred  lines  ;  the  cylinder 
had  a  projection  at  each  end,  by  which  it  could  be  held  and 
slowly  turned  as  the  reading  progressed.  As  the  writing 
material  was  bulky,  space  was  economized  by  printing  close. 
The  characters,  although  very  distinct,  were  sometimes  so 
minute  as  to  require  a  magnifying  glass  to  read  them  ;  and 
that  such  may  have  been  used  is  evidenced  by  the  quartz 
lens  discovered  by  Layard  in  the  ruins  of  Nineveh.  In  the 
last-named  city,  stone,  especially  alabaster,  was  largely  used 
for  records.  The  early  and  extensive  use  of  this  kind  of 
writing  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Sargon — the  first  of  that 
name — established  a  library  which,  from  the  catalogue,  would 
seem  to  have  been  a  public  one,  some  say  as  early  as  —  2000. 
The  Assyrian  kings  declared  their  anxiety  to  make  learning 
accessible  to  the  people.  The  literature  was  varied,  and,  for 
that  time,  extensive,  especially  in  astronomy,  history,  and 
poetry.  As  the  Semitic  race  obtained  the  supremacy,  the  Ac- 
cadians  disappeared  as  a  distinct  people,  but  their  influence 
long  remained.  Their  tablets  were  copied,  commented  on, 
and  translated.  Dictionaries  and  grammars  were  made  for 
their  language  ;  and  it  came  to  be  studied  as  a  dead  and 
learned  tongue,  as  Latin  is  now  in  Europe. 

The  cuneiform  characters — doubtless  originating  as  pictures 
— at  first  represented  things  or  ideas,  and  not  mere  sounds. 
They  continued  to  do  so  in  part  in  the  hands  of  the  Baby- 
lonians and  Assyrians  ;  but  at  the  same  time  they  were  em- 


I04  The  English  Language. 

ployed  for  the  sounds  of  syllables,  without  regard  to  meaning. 
They  were  never  used  as  an  alphabet  of  single  sounds.  A 
word  might  be  expressed  either  by  a  single  character,  or 
spelled  by  the  combinations  that  formed  its  successive  sylla- 
bles. To  distinguish  the  former  use,  it  was  either  preceded 
by  an  unpronounced  character,  like  the  Chinese  keys,  or 
followed  by  a  grammatical  termination.  While  Chinese  and 
Japanese  are  written  vertically  downwards,  and  the  lines 
succeed  each  other  from  right  to  left,  the  cuneiform  was 
written  from  left  to  right. 

When  the  characters  of  Accad  were  adopted  by  the  Shem- 
ites,  the  identities  both  of  sound  and  sense  could  not  be 
preserved.  The  learners  might  accept  the  signification,  and 
express  it  by  a  word  of  their  own,  as  when  we  write  lb.  and 
pronounce  \t  pound ;  or  they  might  adopt  an  opposite  course.' 
In  point  of  fact,  they  tried  to  do  both — the  former  in  writing 
holographically,  the  latter  in  spelling.  This  was  liable  to 
cause  misunderstanding,  which  was  greatly  increased  by  the 
circumstance  that  even  in  Accadian  the  same  character  gen- 
erally stood  for  several  different  words.  The  effect  may  be 
illustrated  in  this  way  :  Suppose  the  Latin  "  anser,"  a  goose, 
to  be  represented  by  a  single  hieroglyphic,  which  we  adopted 
and  pronounced  sometimes  answer  and  at  other  times  goose. 
Suppose  further  that  there  were  local  pronunciations,  such 
as  anther  and  anker ;  we  should  then  have  the  two  families 
of  derivatives : 

a  reply  a  fowl 

to  reply  a  tailor's  smoothing-iron 

a  part  of  a  flower  a  game  of  chance 

a  measure  of  lo  gallons  a  simpleton 

a  ship's  anchor  the  source  of  nursery  rhymes 

Hope 

If  the  original  figure  stood  for  other  words  besides  anser, 
the  number  might  be  indefinitely  increased.  The  first  char- 
acter  in   the   vocabulary  of  Sayce's    Elementary  Assyrian 

*  I  remember  to  have  heard,  when  very  young,  old  persons  call  the  character 
&,  eppershand,  an  expression  to  which  they  attached  no  meaning.  Subsequent 
reflection  led  me  to  suppose  that  the  term  was  et per  se  =  and. 


The  Alphabet.  105 

Grammar,  consisting  of  a  single  horizontal  wedge,  had  in 
Accadian  five  phonetic  values.  When  adopted  into  Assyrian 
it  acquired  thirteen  more,  and  represented  Assyria,  heaven^ 
the  deep,  a  memorial,  obedient,  happy,  to  produce,  to  give,  one, 
in,  etc.  Every  transfer  to  another  dialect  swelled  the  num- 
ber, and  helped  to  fill  the  Land  of  Shinar  with  a  veritable 
"confusions  of  tongues." 

The  Persians,  before  the  time  of  Cyrus  and  Darius  Hys- 
taspes,  seem  to  have  been  ignorant  of  letters.  The  Zend 
Avesta  lays  great  stress  on  the  correct  recitation  of  the 
liturgy,  but  never  alludes  to  reading  or  writing.  In  adopt- 
ing the  cuneiform,  the  Persians  completely  transformed  it. 
The  change  was  so  thorough  that  it  must  have  been  made 
at  once,  and  systematically.  The  redactor  accepted  little 
more  than  a  mere  hint.  He  retained  the  ultimate  wedge- 
shaped  element,  but  rejected  the  greater  part  of  the  groups, 
retaining  only  some  forty  or  fifty.  These  he  altered  and 
simplified  in  form,  and  stripped  of  all  their  primary  signifi- 
cance, so  that,  like  our  letters,  they  expressed  only  sounds. 
The  sounds,  however,  as  in  Japanese,  were  syllables,  and  not 
letters.  Still,  as  some  syllables  are  only  single  vowels,  and 
the  vowels  of  others  are  fleeting  and  ill-defined,  the  new 
syllabary  made  a  near  approach  to  a  real  alphabet.  That 
one  with  views  so  radical  should  have  undertaken  to  work 
over  material  so  unpromising,  proves  conclusively  that  no 
real  alphabet  was  commonly  known  at  that  time — 530  B.C. — 
in  Persia  or  Mesopotamia. 

The  date  of  the  founding  of  the  Egyptian  monarchy  has  been 
variously  estimated  —  Champollion-Figeac  giving  — 5867, 
and  Wilkinson  — 2330.  These  are  near  the  extremes,  but  the 
computations  of  twenty-five  modern  Egyptologists  give  a 
mean  of  — 4180,  from  all  which  it  results  that  Egypt  has  a 
fair  claim  to  priority  over  all  known  establishments.  A  well- 
developed  system  of  pictorial  writing  was  in  use  there  from 
the  earliest  known  dates,  and  continued  wath  little  change 
to  the  second  or  third  Christian  century,  the  last  word  found 
written  being  the  name  of  the  Emperor  Decius.  The  char- 
acters consisted  mostly  of  the  figures  of  men  and  animals — - 


io6  The  English  Language. 

in  whole  or  in  part — celestial  bodies,  trees,  plants,  implements, 
and  familiar  objects.  They  became  world-famous  as  the 
Egyptian  hieroglyphics — a  word  signifying  sacred  carvings, 
— were  used  chiefly  for  monumental  inscriptions,  and  re- 
tained their  pictorial  appearance  to  the  last.  They  were  in 
the  possession  of  the  priesthood,  not  so  much  because  the 
hierarchy  treasured  or  fostered  learning  as  because  in  those 
ages  all  art  and  thought  took  a  religious  form,  and  so  fell  to 
the  lot  of  the  clergy.  Few  strangers  ever  penetrated  the 
secret  of  their  meaning ;  and  until  the  present  century  they 
were  as  much  a  mystery  as  the  fountains  of  the  Nile.  About 
the  time  when  they  passed  out  of  use,  Horapollo,  whose 
name,  half  Egyptian  and  half  Greek,  denoted  one  of  mixed 
blood,  wrote  a  little  book,  still  extant,  explaining  one  hun- 
dred and  eighty  of  the  hieroglyphs.  The  work  was  almost 
entirely  misleading.  It  treated  them  solely  as  ideographs, 
embodying  the  most  strained  and  fanciful  ideas.  As  an 
example,  he  taught  that  1,095,  the  number  of  days  in  three 
years,  denoted  mutism,  because  if  a  child  did  not  speak 
within  that  time  he  was  given  up  as  dumb.  Still,  modern 
research  has  sustained  some  of  his  renderings.  A  few  fanci- 
ful attempts  were  made  at  long  intervals,  but  all  on  the  same 
principle,  although  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Porphyry 
had  declared  that  they  represented  sounds  as  well  as  ideas. 
Zoega,  in  1787,  ventured  the  conjecture  that  the  royal  names 
occurring  in  inscriptions  must  be  written  phonetically. 

Thus  the  case  stood  when  in  1799,  during  the  French 
occupation  of  Egypt,  a  slab  of  basalt  was  found  at  Rosetta, 
bearing  a  triple  inscription  of  some  length  in  hieroglyphics, 
in  the  demotic  character — a  kind  of  short-hand  hieroglyphic 
— and  Greek,  by  means  of  which  Dr.  Young  in  1818  effected 
the  first  breach  in  the  hitherto  impenetrable  lines.  The 
inscriptions  were  naturally  assumed  to  be  three  versions  of 
the  same.  Yet  that  did  not  avail  much,  for  we  might  have, 
for  example,  the  Lord's  prayer  in  Chinese,  and  yet  our  famili- 
arity with  the  subject  might  not  enable  us  to  identify  the 
sound  or  the  sense  of  a  single  character.  But  in  one  part  of 
the  Greek  text  he  found  the  name  Ptolemaios,  and  in  a  corre- 


The  Alphabet.  107 

spending   place   of    the   hieroglyphic    the   enclosed   group, 
which  he  assumed  to  be  its  equivalent.     He  next  conjectured 


(MMl^ 


that  this  should  be  read  from  right  to  left.  The  upper  right- 
hand  character  was  presumed  to  stand  for  P,  and  the  one 
beneath  it  for  T,  without  a  vowel  between.  The  last,  on  the 
left,  was  supposed  to  be  5.  Five  characters  remained  to  take 
the  place  somehow  of  seven  Greek  letters.  This,  which  was 
only  conjectural,  was  about  all  that  was  gained  in  twenty-two 
years  from  the  famous  Rosetta  Stone.  In  1822  an  obelisk  at 
Philae  was  discovered  to  bear  a  hieroglyphic  and  Greek  in- 
scription, from  which  J.  F.  Champollion  made  out  the  name 
of  Cleopatra,  and  confirmed  in  part,  and  in  part  corrected, 
the  results  obtained  by  Dr.  Young.  In  the  succeeding  eight 
or  ten  years  the  names  of  several  native  and  foreign  princes 
were  deciphered  and  a  foundation  prepared  for  reading  the 
hieroglyphics. 

The  Egyptian  writing  did  not  differ  essentially  from  the 
Chinese  or  the  Babylonian.  Originating  as  pictures,  the 
characters  might  be  used  in  at  least  four  different  ways.  We 
might  draw  a  picture  of  a  lion  and  intend  to  express  by  it 
either,  i,  the  animal  itself;  or,  2,  strength,  courage,  or  roy- 
alty; or,  3,  the  syllable  li ;  or,  4,  the  letter  /.  So  the  hiero- 
glyphs were  used  as  syllables,  as  single  articulations,  or  as 
ideographs.  These  several  usages  were  mixed  together  in 
the  same  document.  One  of  the  most  important  uses  of  the 
ideograph  was  exactly  that  of  the  Chinese  "  key."  A  cer- 
tain number  of  them,  of  which  about  one  hundred  have 
been  ascertained,  were  employed  to  designate  classes  of 
things,  and  when  so  used  were  not  pronounced.  Thus  a 
figure  meant  to  suggest  a  pond,  accompanied  any  word  sig- 
nifying waters,  seas,  lakes,  rivers,  canals,  irrigation,  cultiva- 
tion, etc.  Signs  so  used  have  been  called  determinatives. 
They  generally  followed  the  word  as  otherwise  expressed ; 
but  any  number  of  the  letters  or  syllables  might  either  precede 


io8 


The  English  Language, 


or  follow  the  determinative.  They  were  even  attached  to 
holographs  that  seemed  to  need  no  explanation.  A  well 
executed  figure  of  a  goat  might  be  followed  by  a  symbol 
denoting  an  animal,  an  example  followed  by  the  artist  who 
deemed  it  necessary  to  attach  to  his  picture  the  words  "  This 
is  a  horse." 

As  words  are  originally  of  one  syllable,  and  in  some  lan- 
guages most  of  them  continue  so,  symbols  that  represent 
words  necessarily  represent  syllables  ;  and  thus  the  transition 
to  syllabics  is  easy.  Again,  open  syllables,  if  the  vowels  be 
indistinct,  become  mere  single  or  double  consonants.  In 
Egyptian  the  vowels  seem  to  have  been  little  differentiated — 
merely  divided  into  three  indistinct  groups  which  might  be 
roughly  represented  by  the  a  in  man,  the  i  in  machine,  and 
u  in  rule.  When  there  was  no  danger  of  a  mistake  they 
might  be  left  unwritten.  In  this  way  an  actual  alphabet  was 
reached,  but  never  used  as  a  separate  mode  of  writing.  The 
alphabetic  remained  inextricably  mixed  with  all  the  other 
uses  of  hieroglyphs. 

The  Egyptians  wrote  either  vertically  downwards,  from 
left  to  right,  or  from  right  to  left.  The  last  was  the  most 
common. 


HIEROGLYPHIC. 

HIERATIC. 

HIEROGLYPHIC 

HIERATIC. 

f 

^ 

t 

P 

■>« 

t^ 

s 

J> 

A 

A. 

j5 

z 

■^       \ 

r 

4 

a. 

X 

8. 

The  Alphabet.  109 

The  mode  of  writing  thus  described  was  extremely  labo- 
rious, was  adapted  to  inscriptions  on  stone,  and  limited  to 
grave  and  solemn  subjects.  Specimens  have  indeed  been 
found  written  on  papyrus  ;  but  with  the  freer  use  of  that 
material  an  abbreviated  script  was  gradually  introduced. 
This  is  known  as  the  hieratic,  is  the  one  chiefly  found 
on  papyrus  rolls,  and  is  supposed  to  have  been  fairly 
in  use  about  —  2,000,  The  original  pictures  were  here 
greatly  abridged  and  simplified,  as  will  be  seen  by  a  few 
examples  (see  opposite  page). 

A  second  modification,  called  the  demotic,  by  which  the 
hieratic  was  still  further  simplified,  came  into  use  at  a 
later  date,  and  was  employed  for  the  secular  purposes  of 
the  common  people. 

While  the  nations  of  the  East  are  carving  arrow-heads, 
and  the  priests  of  Thebes  executing  miniatures  of  men  and 
animals,  somewhere  in  the  midland  between,  as  early  as  the 
tenth  or  eleventh  century  before  our  era,  real  alphabetic 
writing  all  at  once  appears.  It  is  in  possession  of  the  Phoe- 
nicians and  of  the  Hebrew-speaking  peoples  of  Palestine. 
How,  when,  or  where  it  originated  is  not  yet  established 
beyond  a  doubt,  but  we  will  first  see  what  light  the  alphabet 
itself  sheds  on  the  question.  It  consists  of  twenty  two  let- 
ters— all  consonants — each  bearing  the  name  of  some  object, 
whether  they  resemble  those  objects  or  not.  The  objects 
thus  named  must  have  been  at  least  known  and  familiar. 
Seven  are  parts  of  the  human  body,  and  therefore  common 
to  all  ages  and  countries.  Aleph,  an  ox;  gimel,  a  camel; 
hheth,  a  fence  or  hedge  ;  lamed,  an  ox-goad ;  tsade,  a  sickle ; 
tau,  a  cross-mark  branded  on  cattle,  denote  a  settled  agri- 
cultural and  pastoral  life.  Beth,  a  house ;  daleth,  a  door ; 
he,  a  window ;  vau,  a  nail ;  sam.ekh,  a  post,  show  a  people 
who  no  longer  dwelt  in  tents,  but  in  fixed  habitations. 
Mem,  waters  ;  and  nun,  a  fish,  imply  the  presence  of  bodies 
of  water  sufnciently  large  to  make  fishing  an  object.  There 
is  no  allusion  to  trade  or  navigation  ;  hence  the  alphabet 
probably  did  not  originate  among  the  Phoenicians  after  they 
became  a  seafaring  people,  distinct  from  the  other  inhabi- 


1  lo  The  English  Language. 

tants  of  Canaan.  The  other  conditions  might  be  satisfied 
by  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  by  Egypt,  or  by  the  Jor- 
dan and  its  lakes. 

The  origin  of  this  art  of  writing  must  be  referred  to  a 
pretty  early  date.  The  books  of  Joshua  and  Judges  *  rep- 
resent that  Debir  was  called,  before  the  conquest  of  Canaan, 
Kirjath-sepher,  the  City  of  the  Book,  or,  as  the  Chaldee 
paraphrast  renders  it,  the  City  of  Records. 

The  general  belief  of  antiquity  was  that  the  art  arose 
among  the  Phoenicians,  who  derived  the  idea  from  the 
Egyptians.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Philo  of  Byblus,  the 
most  considerable  Phoenician  writer  of  whom  any  remains 
have  reached  us.  The  same  belief  was  shared  by  Diodorus 
Siculus,"  Tacitus,"  and  others.  But  here  it  will  be  safest  to 
consider  the  Phoenicians  as  merely  the  best-known  represen- 
tative of  a  family  group  of  tribes,  closely  allied  in  tongue 
and  lineage,  dwelling  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  west- 
ern sea.  The  most  that  can  be  said  against  this  view  is  its 
want  of  complete  proof.  Equal  probability  has  not  been 
adduced  in  favor  of  any  other  origin. 

Sometime  about  1854  the  French  Academy  of  Inscrip- 
tions and  Belles-Lettres  proposed,  as  the  subjects  of  two 
essays,  the  Origin  and  the  Diffusion  of  the  Phoenician  Al- 
phabet. The  first  was  undertaken  by  the  distinguished 
Egyptologist,  the  Vicompte  de  Roug^,  whose  essay  was 
read  and  accepted  in  1859.  The  question  of  the  Diffusion 
was  discussed  by  Fr.  Lenormant^  whose  long  and  elaborate 
report  was  not  presented  until  1872.  These  two  essays  are 
regarded  as  having  settled,  at  least  provisionally,  the  ques- 
tion of  the  origin  of  alphabetic  writing. 

They  agree  in  deriving  the  alphabet  from  the  Egyptian 
hieratic.  Their  success  cannot  fairly  be  considered  com- 
plete ;  but  then  we  are  to  bear  in  mind  that  one  set  of  char- 
acters may  be  known  to  be  derived  from  another,  and  yet 
show  little  resemblance.     A  few  single  characters  may  pre- 

*  Joshua,  XV.,  15  ;  Judges,  i.,  11. 
'  Hist.,  1.,  69. 
'  Annals,  xi. ,  14. 


The  Alphabet.  ill 

serve  a  striking  resemblance  to  their  parents,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  letter  representing  the  sound  of  sh  in  ship,  thus : 


Hieroglyphic   {Shni,  a          j.t.t      Old  Hebrew  W    vx' 

bed  of  plants)  ^^ 

Hieratic  ^ 


Demotic  W 

Phoenician  W     *^ 


Square  Hebrew  ^ 

Arabic  m* 


Coptic  U| 

Russian   (from   Cop-  .w. 

tic)  "^ 


In  Greek  and  old  Latin  inscriptions  the  character,  as 
acquired  from  the  Phoenicians,  is  found  turned  in  various 
positions :  M  M  SS  .  In  one  it  is  still  easily  recognized  as  the 
Greek  -2".  It  is  sometimes  found  without  the  bottom  stroke 
^  In  the  continuous  curve  lines  that  distinguish  hand- 
writing from  inscriptions  it  becomes  S,  S,  S,  and  by  the 
atrophy  of  the  upper  loop  we  get  the  small  s  of  our  every- 
day writing,  "^f  (f.  But  the  family  likeness  is  seldom  pre- 
served so  long  and  so  well. 

M.  Lenormant  holds  that  the  alphabet  is  derived  from  a 
rather  old  style  of  hieratic — earlier  than  the  XVIII  dynasty, 
to  which  Lepsius  assigned  the  date — 1 591,  and  the  more 
recent  Egyptologist  Mariette— 1703.  This  would  place  it 
during  or  before  the  invasion  of  the  Hykshos,  or  Shepherds. 
That  pastoral  Shemitic  tribes  about  that  time  entered  Egypt 
from  Canaan  and  dominated  for  a  long  period  admits  of  no 
doubt,  or  that  their  rule  made  the  memory  of  Shepherds 
"an  abomination  to  the  Egyptians."  The  latter  identified 
these  invaders  with  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan.  There  is  a 
very  attractive  hypothesis,  advanced  or  cited  approvingly  by 
Ewald,  Boetticher,  Longerke,  Renan,  and  Lenormant,  that 
these  Canaanites  developed  the  alphabet  during  their  stay 
in  Egypt ;  yet,  however  plausible,  it  is  only  conjecture.  Be 
that  as  it  may,  among  them  it  first  comes  to  light ;  and  the 
examples  of  the  Japanese  and  the  Persians  make  it  prob- 


112  The  English  Language. 

able  that  the  first  idea  was  derived  from  some  older  system. 
They  occupied  the  same  vantage-ground  as  the  last-named 
peoples.  The  foreign  characters  would  not  represent  to 
them  both  the  original  sounds  and  significations.  Unlike 
the  natives,  they  were  not  withheld  by  any  national  pride, 
priesthood,  or  piety  from  handling  them  as  best  suited  their 
own  purposes.  Like  the  Japanese  and  Persians,  they  disre- 
garded the  meaning  altogether,  caring  only  for  the  sounds, 
and  preserving  at  first  something  of  the  original  forms.  Part 
of  the  Egyptian  characters  already  represented  single  articu- 
lations, while  a  larger  part  expressed  syllables.  The  Canaan- 
ites  were  led  to  reject  the  latter  by  the  peculiar  circumstance 
that  their  language  almost  ignored  vowel  sounds,  and  re- 
garded them  as  too  unstable  to  be  expressed.  With  them 
ba,  be,  bi,  bo,  bu,  were  alike  merely  b  ;  and  they  wrote  Leba- 
non, Ibnn.  It  is  true  that  after  a  time  certain  consonants 
came  to  be  associated  with  their  respective  groups  of  vowel 
sounds,  and  were  sometimes  used  to  show  their  location,  for 
the  sake  of  emphasis  or  distinction.  As  only  single  articulate 
sounds  were  to  be  expressed,  but  a  small  number  of  charac- 
ters were  required. 

New  names  were  given  to  the  letters  without  any  refer- 
ence to  the  old  ones  or  to  any  principle  of  selection  that  we 
can  discover.  Perhaps  some  light  may  be  thrown  on  the 
naming  of  letters  by  the  Old  Norse  Runic  alphabet  in 
which  the  objects  and  order  selected  were :  money,  a  bull,  a 
thorn,  the  mouth  of  a  river,  riding,  a  boil,  hail,  need,  ice,  a  year, 
the  sun,  the  god  of  war,  the  birch,  man,  law,  the  yew  tree.  It 
is  pretty  clear  that  these  names  were  not  chosen  because  of 
their  meaning  but  because  they  were  convenient  words  of 
one  syllable  that  could  be  woven  into  some  kind  of  mne- 
monic jingle. 

When  letters  have  once  been  imbedded  in  acrostic  verses 
they  continue  to  be  learned  and  repeated  in  a  particular 
order.  There  is  reason  to  believe  this  was  the  case  with  the 
primitive  alphabet  from  a  very  early  period.  Psalms  iii, 
112,  119,  Proverbs  xxxi.,  10  to  the  end,  Lam.  i.,  are  acrostics 
in  the  Hebrew  text,  as  are  also  Psalms  25,  34,  37,  145,  and 


The  Alphabet.  113 

Lamentations  ii.,  iii.,  iv.,  although  with  some  irregulari- 
ties. The  alphabetical  order  of  the  letters,  too,  determined 
their  value  as  numerals,  and  so  formed  the  basis  of  that 
strangely  fanciful  system  of  rabbinical  interpretation  called 
gamatria,  of  which  Rev.  xiii.,  18,  is  the  most  famous  ex- 
ample. Several  tablets  in  the  British  Museum  from  the 
Library  of  Assurbanipal — the  Sardanapalus  of  the  Greeks — 
give  the  Phoenician  letters  with  their  mystic  numeral  powers 
explained  in  cuneiform,  thus  showing  that  the  alphabetic 
order  was  established  before  the  fall  of  the  Assyrian  empire. 
Mariette  has  discovered  acrostic  hymns  on  the  walls  of  Egyp- 
tian temples,  but  the  order  of  the  characters  is  wholly  differ- 
ent from  that  of  the  Hebrew.  The  order  of  the  letters  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  determined  by  any  rational  and  con- 
sistent principle,  yet,  as  the  three  grave  mutes,  B,  G,  D,  are 
placed  in  one  group  and  the  three  liquids,  L,  M,  N,  in 
another,  it  does  not  seem  to  have  been  left  entirely  to 
chance. 

The  landmarks  and  outlines  of  an  alphabet  must  be  the 
work  of  a  single  hand.  It  would  be  left  to  successors  only 
to  distinguish  the  fainter  shades  of  sound.  The  scheme 
must  be  in  some  measure  complete  before  it  can  be  of  any 
use.  An  alphabet,  like  a  parliamentary  body,  requires  a 
quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business. 

The  forms  of  the  earliest  letters  are  learned  from  inscrip- 
tions on  durable  material,  and  from  papyrus  rolls  found  in 
ancient  tombs  in  the  dry  climate  of  Egypt.  The  table  given 
on  page  114  exhibits  some  of  the  principal  examples. 

The  first  column  is  the  Egyptian  hieratic,  prior  to  the 
XVIII.  dynasty,  given  by  Fr.  Lenormant  as  the  basis  of  the 
Phoenician.  The  reader  can  form  his  own  opinion  as  to  the 
degree  of  likeness,  and  the  probability  of  the  derivation. 

No.  2  is  a  short  inscription  around  the  rim  of  a  bronze 
patera,  or  dish,  obtained  in  1877  from  a  junk-dealer  in  the 
island  of  Cyprus.  The  inscription  is  a  dedication  of  the  ves- 
sel to  the  temple  of  Baal-Lebanon,  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Sidon.  The  giver  styles  himself  a  servant  of  King  Hiram. 
If  this  prince  could  be  proved  to  be  the  king  of  Tyre  who 


114 

Jhe 

JingLtsh 

-  La7 

iguage. 

Names  of 
Letters 

I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

' 

Aleph.... 

z 

< 

f 

f/=A 

!^ 

'^ 

^  A 

A 

S 

Beth 

^ 

^ 

^ 

9? 

•1 

J 

%^ 

^ 

n 

Gimel 

<5 

-/ 

A 

7 

/\^z 

<C 

i 

Daleth... 

^ 

A 

.^ 

'\  f 

^ 

< 

Z^  P 

OD 

T 

He 

nr 

^ 

^  ^ 

\ 

f 

\/^ 

^ 

n 

Vav 

^ 

f 

^ 

^ 

1 

n 

^/> 

f^F 

1 

Zayin 

r 

I 

t 

z  t 

V 

? 

xz 

h 
1 

Kheth  . . . 

0 

H 

-r 

« 

''^ 

B 

B 

H 

n 

Teth 

Ci, 

&> 

0 

® 

2D 

Yod 

V 

X 

? 

A.-^^ 

t1 

2. 

It 

I 

> 

Caph  .... 

<\ 

1 

/ 

1 

f 

}) 

i  K 

K 

:d 

Lamed. . . 

L. 

I 

(: 

U 

^ 

L 

/^ 

L 

^ 

Mem  .... 

^ 

•^ 

7 

"1> 

7 

> 

-^/A 

M  M 

it3 

Nun 

> 

1 

; 

> 

'r 

V|/v 

h  N 

J 

Samech . . 

-^ 

:: 

f 

1 

\ 

'U 

f   H 

D 

Ayin 

. 

0 

o 

OtO 

0 

0 

o 

0 

y 

Pe 

^ 

^ 

1 

/ 

y 

nr 

PP 

S} 

Tsade 

y^ 

yi 

n- 

A 

V 

/z- 

» 

Koph.... 

/CW 

9 

f 

? 

"V 

? 

0 

Q 

P 

Resh 

9 

^ 

^ 

<^/' 

A 

^ 

^pp 

(^  R 

*1 

Shin 

% 

w 

lA/ 

w 

u/ 

w 

/^i^ 

£^s 

ti:; 

Tav 

6 

"j- 

X 

f 

/ 

t 

'r 

T 

n 

The  Alphabet.  .    115 

was  the  friend  of  David  and  Solomon,  it  would  carry  the  in- 
scription back  to  the  eleventh  century  before  the  Christian 
era,  and  would  make  it  the  oldest  yet  known. 

No.  3.  The  Moabite  Stone.'  This  highly  interesting 
monument  first  came  to  the  knowledge  of  Europeans  in 
1868-9.  It  was  then  a  piece  of  black  basalt,  about  3  ft.  10  in. 
X  2  ft.  X  14  in.,  bearing  an  inscription  of  thirty-four  lines  on 

'  The  following  is  a  translation  of  so  much  as  remains  of  this  important 
monument : 

' '  I  am  Mesha  the  son  of  Chemosh  .  .  .  the  Dibonite,  King  of  Moab. 
My  father  reigned  over  Moab  thirty  years,  and  I  reigned  after  my  father  ;  and 
I  have  built  this  altar  to  Chemosh  in  the  plain  in  .  .  .  because  he  has 
helped  us  in  all  our  straits,  and  has  caused  me  to  see  the  downfall  of  all  my 
enemies.  Omri,  King  of  Israel,  arose  and  oppressed  Moab  many  days,  when 
Chemosh  was  angry  against  his  land.  And  his  son  followed  him  and  said  like- 
wise :  I  will  oppress  Moab.  He  said  this  in  my  days  ;  and  I  have  seen  the 
downfall  of  him  and  of  his  house,  and  Israel  is  utterly  undone  forever.  And 
Omri  took,  the  .  .  .  Medeba  and  placed  a  garrison  therein  .  ,  .  his 
son  forty  years.  And  Chemosh  restored  it  in  my  days,  and  I  built  Baal-Meon 
and  placed  .  .  .  therein ;  and  I  .  .  .  Kirjathaim.  Now  the  men  of 
Gad  had  dwelt  in  the  land  from  of  old  ;  and  the  King  of  Israel  built  . 
and  I  fought  against  the  fortress  and  took  it,  and  devoted  all  that  were  therein 
to  Chemosh  and  to  Moab  ;  and  I  brought  back  the  .  .  .  before  Chemosh 
in  Kirjath.  And  I  brought  thither  the  men  of  Sharon  [?]  and  the  men  of  the 
East  [?]. 

"  And  Chemosh  said  to  me  :  Go  take  Nebo  from  Israel  .  .  .  went  in  the 
night  and  I  fought  against  them  from  the  morning  light  until  mid-day,  and  I 
slew  them  all,  seven  thousand,  as  a  sacrifice  to  Ashtar-Chemosh.  And  I  took 
thence  all  that  belonged  to  Jehovah  and     .     .     .     them  before  Chemosh. 

"And  the  King  of  Israel  built  Jahaz  and  put  a  garrison  therein  in  the  war 
against  me,  but  Chemosh  drove  him  out  before  me.  And  I  took  two  hundred 
men  out  of  Moab,  all  of  them  chief  men,  and  led  them  up  against  Jahaz  and 
took  it  .  .  .  unto  Dibon,  and  I  built  the  defences  of  the  city,  and  I  built 
the  gates  and  the  towers  thereof,  and  I  built  the  King's  house,  and  I  made 
lodgings  for  men  within  the  wall  and  storehouses  for  corn  in  the  plain.  And  I 
said  to  all  the  people  :  Let  each  man  make  a  cistern  in  his  house.  And  I  digged 
again  the  water  courses  digged  by  Israel  for  the  plain  ;  and  I  built  Aroer  ;  and 
I  made  the  causeway  over  the  Arnon  ;  and  I  built  the  mountain  temple,  that  had 
been  laid  waste  ;  and  I  built  Bezer,  for  .  .  .  fifty  of  the  men  of  Dibon,  for 
all  Dibon  was  obedient.  And  I  .  .  .  the  cattle  that  I  brought  into  the 
land  ;  and  I  built  .  .  .  and  the  temple  of  Diblathaim  and  the  temple  of 
Baal-Meon  ;  and  I  brought  thither  .  .  .  the  land,  and  Horonaim,  and  I 
returned  thither  in  .  .  .  and  Chemosh  said  unto  me  :  Go  fight  against 
Horonaim,  and     ..." 


1 1 6  The  English  Language. 

its  principal  face,  and  lying  amidst  the  ruins  of  the  ancient 
city  of  Dibon,  east  of  the  Dead  Sea.  Many  efforts  to  obtain 
copies,  impressions,  or  the  stone  itself,  were  made  with  vary- 
ing success,  especially  by  Ch.  Clermont  Ganneau,  a  zealous 
young  scholar  attached  to  the  French  consulate  at  Jerusalem. 
These,  with  the  high  prices  offered,  excited  the  cupidity  of 
the  Bedouins  and  the  local  authorities,  who  quarrelled 
among  themselves,  and,  by  the  alternate  application  of  fire 
and  cold  water,  broke  the  stone  in  pieces,  and  carried  off  the 
smaller  fragments.  Happily  the  larger  pieces  were  event- 
ually secured,  and  are  now  in  the  Louvre  in  Paris ;  and, 
with  the  various  imperfect  copies  that  had  been  taken,  give 
the  greater  part  of  the  legend.  It  was  found  to  be  nearly 
pure  Hebrew — what  Isaiah  (xix.,  i8)  calls  "the  language  of 
Canaan  " — and  by  that  Mesha  mentioned  2  Kings,  iii.,  4, 
therefore  about  the  date  of  —  890. 

No.  4.  Mr.  Layard  found  in  the  ruins  of  Nimroud,  the 
ancient  Nineveh,  sixteen  bronze  lions,  evidently  intended  for 
a  set  of  weights,  and  ranging  from  forty  pounds  to  an  ounce 
and  a  half.  They  were  found  to  bear  inscriptions  in  Phoeni- 
cian and  Assyrian  characters,  and  to  be  marked  with  the 
name  of  Shalmanassur  IV.,  which  fixes  their  age  at  about 
—  825.  These  three  agree  in  presenting  an  archaic  style 
of  the  letters  quite  distinguishable  from  that  of  the  next 
specimen. 

No.  5  is  the  inscription  of  Eshmunazar,  discovered  in 
January,  1855.  Some  natives  then  digging  for  buried  treas- 
ure in  the  necropolis  of  old  Sidon  came  upon  a  tomb  con- 
taining a  basaltic  sarcophagus,  in  Egyptian  style,  bearing 
upon  the  cover  a  Phoenician  inscription  in  twenty-two  lines. 
This  proved  to  be  the  grave  of  a  king  named  Eshmunazar, 
son  of  Tabnith  and  grandson  of  Eshmunazar — all  otherwise 
unknown.  Here  was  the  first  Phoenician  inscription  found 
in  the  mother  country,  and  the  most  considerable  yet  found 
anywhere.  According  to  a  custom  common  in  the  East,  the 
monarch  prepares  his  own  grave  and  writes  his  own  epitaph. 
He  says  little  that  is  of  strictly  historical  interest,  as  he 
mentions  no  person  or  event  that  can  be  identified,  yet,  as 


The  Alphabet.  117 

he  acknowledges  to  have  received  from  the  Lord  of  Kings — 
adn  ntlchnt,  a  term  known  to  apply  to  the  Persian  monarch — 
Dor  and  Joppa,  in  the  plain  of  Sharon,  it  is  presumable  that 
he  lived,  died,  and  was  buried  between  —  538  and  —  334. 
Treasure-seeking  in  the  East  is  as  old  as  the  Book  of  Job, 
and  the  unfortunate  king,  aware  of  that  fact,  and  bereaved 
of  all  his  sons,  pours  forth  abundant  curses  against  the 
grave-robber  or  treasure-seeker  who  should  remove  his  coffin 
or  violate  the  place  of  his  rest,  declaring  that  there  is  no 
treasure  there.  But  vain  are  curses  ;  the  sarcophagus  is  now 
in  the  Louvre  in  Paris,  and  when  found  had  been  already 
empty  for  unknown  ages. 

No.  6  is  Old  Hebrew  as  found  on  engraved  seals  and 
trinkets  of  various  dates  before  and  after  —  600.  The  Gimel 
and  Hheth  are  from  ancient  shekels,  supposed  to  have  been 
struck  soon  after  the  return  from  the  captivity. 

Thus  far  all  the  specimens  were  written  from  right  to  left. 

No.  7.  Early  Greek.  This  is  from  various  inscriptions 
dating  from  —  616  downwards.  The  story  repeated  by  Pliny 
(vii.-56)  that  Cadmus  brought  sixteen  letters  from  Phoenicia 
to  Greece,  and  that  eight  others  were  afterwards  invented  by 
Palamedes  and  Simonides,  is  only  an  idle  tale  inconsistent 
with  the  facts.  The  Greeks  at  first  naturally  wrote  from 
right  to  left,  like  their  instructors ;  next  backwards  and  for- 
wards, like  the  movement  of  a  plough,  and  hence  called 
boustrophedon ;  and  at  last  only  from  left  to  right.  The 
alphabet,  like  the  language,  of  Greece  was  broken  into 
several  dialects,  the  most  prolific  of  which  was  the  Chalcid- 
ian,  which  was  introduced  into  the  Greek  trading  towns  of 
the  Italian  coast,  and  became  the  parent  of  all  the  alphabets 
of  Western  Europe. 

No.  8.     Old  Latin. 

No.  9.  Square  Hebrew.  This  peculiar  character  came  into 
use  after  the  return  from  the  captivity,  together  with  the 
language  to  which  it  belonged — Aramaic,  or  the  language  of 
the  region  north  of  Palestine,  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the 
Tigris.  Jewish  tradition  ascribes  its  introduction  to  Ezra. 
It  is  likely  that  it  came  into  use  later  and  gradually.     The 


ii8 


The  English  Language. 


oldest  known  inscription  in  this  character  is  of  the  date  of 
—  176. 

In  adopting  the  alphabet  the  Greeks  retained  with  little 
change  the  names  and  order  of  the  letters ;  and  the  order  is 
still  substantially  that  of  all  our  text-books. 


HEBREW. 

GREEK.      ENGLISH. 

HEBREW. 

GREEK. 

ENGLISH, 

Aleph 

Alpha 

A 

Lamed 

Lambda 

L 

Beth 

Beta 

B 

Mem 

Mu 

M 

Gimel 

Gamma 

Nun 

Nu 

N 

Daleth 

Delta 

D 

Samekh 

Xi 

He 

E  psilon 

E 

Ain 

0  mikron 

0 

Vau 

(Digamma) 

F 

Pe 

Pi 

P 

Zain 

Zeta 

Tsade 

Hheth 

Eta 

Koph 

(Koppa) 

Q 

Teth 

Theta 

Resh 

Ro 

R 

led 

Iota 

I 

Shin 

San,  Sigma 

S 

Caph 

Kappa 

K 

Tau 

Tau 

T 

Thus  the  arrangement  of  the  letters  now  learned  by  every 
child  is  as  old  as  the  days  of  Jeremiah. 

The  application  of  an  Eastern  alphabet  to  the  radically 
different  language  of  Hellas  involved  many  changes.  The 
Greeks,  in  altering  the  direction  of  their  writing,  turned  also 
their  letters  round.  The  nations  of  Canaan  had  omitted  all 
vowels,  but  inserted  signs  for  a  number  of  more  or  less  for- 
cible breathings ;  the  Greeks  considered  the  former  indis- 
pensable, the  latter  almost  useless.  Hence  they  ingeniously 
turned  Aleph  into  A,  He  into  E^  and  Ain  to  O.  Hheth  was 
retained  for  a  time  as  an  h,  but  eventually  transformed  into 
a  vowel,  probably  with  the  power  of  the  Spanish  ey.  This 
left  the  alphabet  without  an  H.  Its  place  was  poorly 
supplied  by  the  spiritus  asper,  while  the  zero  power  of  Aleph 
was  represented  by  the  spiritus  lenis.  For  a  time  Vau  kept 
its  place  and  the  power  of  our  w.  It  obtained  the  name  of 
Digamma,  which  referred  to  its  form  and  not  to  its  sound, 
but  was  at  last  abandoned  altogether.  Yod  lost  the  semi- 
vocal  power  of  y,  and  became  the  vowel  /'.  The  Shemitic 
alphabet  had  four  letters,  Zain,  Tsade,  Samekh  and  Shin, 


The  Alphabet.  119 

having  sibilant  or  hissing  sounds.  The  Greeks  reduced  the 
first  two  of  these  to  one,  having  the  form  and  place  of  Zain, 
the  name  of  Zeta,  and  the  power  of  dz.  Samekh  was  trans- 
formed into  H.  Its  original  power  was  retained  by  a  letter 
having  the  sound  of  Samekh  and  the  place  of  Shin,  while  its 
Dorian  name  of  San  resembled  the  latter,  and  the  Ionic 
Sigma  is  suggestive  of  the  former.  Teth  became  Theta. 
Koph,  as  a  second  k,  was  entirely  superfluous,  but  it  kept  its 
place  as  a  numeral,  with  the  value  of  90  and  the  name  of 
Koppa.  The  Dorians,  ever  unwilling  to  learn  or  forget, 
retained  it  as  a  letter,  and  carried  it  into  Italy.  Five  letters 
were  added  at  the  end  of  the  alphabet.  When  or  by  whom 
2"  was  introduced  is  unknown.  It  had  probably  nearly  the 
sound  of  the  French  u  or  the  German  u.  ^,  with  X  and  0, 
formed  a  triad  of  so-called  aspirates,  with  the  powers,  ap- 
proximately, oip'k,  k'k,  fh,  somewhat  as  in  uphold,  pack-horse^ 
pot-hook.  W,  a  quite  unnecessary  compound  letter,  is  said  to 
have  been  introduced  by  Epicharmus  about  —  500.  i2  is  a 
modification  of  O  due  to  the  need  of  distinguishing  the  long 
sounds  of  the  vowel  from  the  short.  We  are  not  to  suppose 
that  all  these  changes  were  effected  at  once,  or  that  they 
obtained  equal  currency  in  all  the  discordant  states  of  Greece. 

The  Chalcidian  alphabet,  introduced  into  Cumae  and  some 
other  Greek  colonies  in  Italy,  had  certain  peculiarities.  The 
Gamma  became  a  semicircle,  open  towards  the  right.  Rho, 
which  was  liable  to  be  mistaken  for  some  forms  of  Pi,  had  a 
stroke  added,  giving  it  the  form  R.  Sigma  had  three  forms 
— the  old  zigzag  figure  of  four  strokes,  but  turned  half-way 
round  ;  second,  the  same  with  one  of  the  strokes  omitted  ; 
and  third  a  serpentine  curve,  somewhat  like  S.  To  distin- 
guish Iota  from  Sigma,  the  former  was  reduced  to  a  single 
vertical  stroke.  The  figure  X  had  been  adopted  to  indicate 
the  sound  of  kh.  This  character  followed  by  s  had  been  used 
for  kSf  and  eventually  retained  that  value  when  the  s  was 
omitted.  Finally  Vwas  used  for  kh,  the  same  figure  which 
survived  in  Greek  as  the  representative  of  ps. 

The  alphabet  was  brought  into  Italy  while  writing  was 
still  directed  from  right  to  left.     The  literary  remains  of  all 


1 20  The  English  Language. 

the  Italian  nations  except  the  Romans  have  that  direction. 
The  appHcation  of  letters  to  the  Latin  tongue  necessitated 
still  further  changes.  Zeta  and  Theta  were  entirely 
dropped.  Gamma,  written  in  the  semicircular  form,  gradu- 
ually  lost  the  sound  of  g,  and  acquired  that  of  k,  indicating 
that  the  two  sounds  were  not  clearly  distinguished.  At  the 
same  time  Kappa  became  unnecessary,  and  was  retained 
only  in  the  peculiar  word  kalendce,  and  as  an  abbreviation 
for  a  few  words  and  proper  names  otherwise  written  with  C. 
After  a  time  it  was  found  necessary  to  restore  the  lost 
sound,  when  a  heavy  stroke  was  added  to  the  lower  ex- 
tremity of  the  semicircle,  and  it  was  assigned,  as  the  letter 
G,  to  the  place  once  occupied  by  Zeta.  The  Vau  of  the 
Phoenicians,  soon  dropped  by  the  Greeks  as  a  letter,  was 
retained  by  the  Latins  for  the  sound  of  f.  H  was  retained 
with  the  value  of  h,  and  not  of  ey.  The  short  stem  of 
Koppa  was  turned  obliquely  to  the  right,  and  it  became  (2, 
with  the  value  of  kw,  a  favorite  combination  in  Latin,  where 
it  was  followed  by  a  superfluous  u,  or  was  itself  a  supernu- 
merary k.  The  Roman  grammarians  were  not  agreed  as  to 
which  was  the  true  explanation.  U,  written  with  the  form  of 
Vy  had  as  a  vowel  the  long  sound  of  u  in  rule,  and  a  shorter 
sound,  probably  like  the  German  u.  The  Latin  alphabet 
ended  with  Jf  as  late  as  the  time  of  Augustus,*  when  Fand 
Z  were  added  in  writing  words  borrowed  from  the  Greek. 

The  Romans,  after  a  time,  dropped  the  long  Greek  names 
of  the  letters,  which  were  becoming  more  absurd  and  un- 
meaning at  every  step,  and  called  them  ah^  bay,  cay,  day, 
etc.,  combining  a  single  vowel  with  each  consonant.  Where 
the  consonant  represented  a  merely  momentary  sound,  it 
was  placed  before  the  vowel ;  one  of  continuous  sound,  as 
/,  ;«,  n,  r,  s,  was  put  after  the  vowel." 

'  Suetonius,  Octav.,  88. 

'  I  cannot  but  think  that  the  lines  of  Juvenal — 

"  Unde  habeas,  quaerit  nemo  ;  sedoportet  habere. 
Hoc  monstrant  vetulae  pueris  repentibus  assse  : 
Hoc  discunt  omnes  ante  alpha  et  beta  puellae." 

(Sat.,  xiv.,  207) — 
imply  that  in  the  second  century  the  letters  were  stilJ  known  by  the  Greek 


The  Alphabet'  121 

Thus  far  we  have  been  considering  characters  such  as  we 
should  call  capitah,  distinguished  by  large  size,  straight 
lines,  and  angles,  such  as  would  be  made  by  a  chisel  upon 
wood  or  stone.  Writing  with  a  pen  or  pencil  tends  to  run 
in  curves  and  link  the  letters  together.  Gradually  there 
grew  up,  both  in  Greek  and  Latin,  a  style  termed  uncial — 
a  word  of  uncertain  origin  and  meaning,  which  we  owe  to 
Saint  Jerome.  The  characteristics  of  this  style  are,  some- 
what reduced  size,  curved  lines,  and  part  of  the  letters 
extending  above  or  below  the  others.  Specimens  of  this 
style  have  been  met  with  as  old  as  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  B.C.,  and  it  continued  in  use  until  the  ninth  century. 
The  most  celebrated  specimens  are  certain  old  copies  of  the 
Scriptures,  as  the  Vatican  Manuscript,  the  Alexandrian 
Codex,  and  the  Sinaitic  Codex. 

But  the  uncial  letters  were  only  a  transition  to  the  minus- 
cules, which  we  familiarly  call  stnall  letters.  This  kind  of 
character,  like  all  others,  came  into  use  gradually ;  and 
capitals,  uncials,  and  minuscules  were  long  used  together, 
according  to  the  taste  of  the  writer  or  the  impulse  of  the 
moment.  By  the  eighth  century,  when  Latin  was  the  prin- 
cipal written  language  throughout  Europe,  great  confusion 
prevailed  from  local  peculiarities  of  penmanship  and  spell- 
ing. Then  Charlemagne,  by  an  ordinance  of  the  year  789, 
required  the  books  of  the  Church  to  be  revised  and  cor- 
rected. The  result  was  a  beautiful  and  regular  minuscule 
style,  which  became  the  basis  of  the  written  and  printed 
character  of  all  Europeans  and  their  descendants,  except 
those  of  the  Greek  Church. 

The  style  of  letters  called  italics,  commonly  used  to 
express  emphasis  or  antithesis,  was  introduced  about  the 
year  1500  by  Aldus  Manutius,  a  publisher  of  Venice,  from 
whose  press  were  issued  the  celebrated  Aldine  classics. 
Italics  are  employed  in  the  Bible  to  render  more  intelligible 

names.  On  the  other  hand  it  is  perfectly  clear  from  Ausonius  (Technopaeg- 
nion  348,  London  ed.,  1823)  and  Terentianus  Maurus  (De  Litteris),  that  by 
the  fourth  century  these  had  been  completely  displaced  by  the  simpler 
appellations. 


122  The  English  Language, 

the  elliptical  expressions  of  the  original,  and,  occasion- 
ally, as  in  2  Sam.,  xxi.,  19,  to  give  a  more  acceptable 
version. 

The  nations  of  northern  Europe,  who  possessed  the  runic 
characters,  did  not  employ  them  for  writing  books,  and  no 
trace  of  them  remains  now  in  use  except  in  Icelandic.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Romans  carried  their  alphabet  into 
Britain  where  it  was  learned  by  the  Celtic  inhabitants.  The 
Saxons  learned  to  read  and  write  from  the  vanquished 
Britons.  But  during  the  five  centuries  of  Roman  dominion 
and  Saxon  invasion  several  differences  of  usage  had  grown 
up.  The  letters  d,  f,  g,  r,  s,  t,  were  not  written  and  pro- 
nounced as  on  the  Continent.  C  had  exclusively  the  hard 
sound  and,  with  the  addition  of  w,  rendered  both  k  and  q 
unnecessary.  Z  was  not  used.  The  sounds  which  we  repre- 
sent by  th  in  thin  and  by  w  were  indicated  by  the  runes 
thorn  and  wen,  J;  and  p  ;  that  of  th  in  thitie  by  a  ^crossed,  "S. 
After  the  Norman  Conquest  the  Saxon  peculiarities  gradually 
disappeared.  Wen  was  replaced  by  two  vs.,  whence  its 
modern  name  of  double-u.  The  stricken  d  gave  place  either  to 
a  plain  d,  or  to  the  runic  thorn,  which  continued  to  hold  its 
place  until  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century.  Its  loss — a 
really  serious  one — was  probably  due  to  the  early  printers, 
whose  types  made  for  Latin  and  continental  languages  had  no 
representative  for  this  peculiar  English  sound.  The  art  of 
making  books  by  machinery  introduced  disorder  in  two 
other  instances.  The  old  Saxon  g,  besides  the  sound  in  go 
had,  in  middle  English,  two  others,  one  of  which  is  now 
entirely  lost  to  the  language,  leading  to  further  confusion. 
Sometimes  alone,  and  always  when  combined  with  h,  it  had 
the  value  of  the  German  g  in  Burg ;  at  other  times  it  had 
the  sound  nearly  of  our  initial  j/.  For  these  two  sounds  the 
Saxon  form  had  been  preserved.  The  printers  having  no 
types  for  this  character  took  others  that  seemed  nearest  in  ap- 
pearance, not  in  value.  They  selected  y  to  represent  th,  and 
z  for  either  g  or  th.  Thus  it  comes  about  that  the  people 
of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  are  represented  in 
old  books  as  if  they  said  zour  for  your,  zou  for  you,  and  yey 


The  Alphabet.  123 

yat,  yein  instead  of  the,  that,  them,  whereas  they  really  spoke 
much  as  we  do.* 

Every  language  requires  an  alphabet  adapted  to  its  own 
special  system  of  sounds.  Such  alphabet,  to  be  perfect, 
should  have  a  separate  character  for  every  single  sound,  or 
shade  of  sound  worth  distinguishing,  while  no  character 
should  represent  more  than  one.  The  letters  should  be 
easy  to  distinguish,  and  in  writing  should  be  easy  to  make ; 
and,  combined  in  words,  they  should  present  a  neat  and  ele- 
gant appearance.  It  may  be  safely  affirmed  that  all  these 
requirements  have  never  yet  been  met.  Our  own  alphabet 
offers  little  ground  for  complaint  in  regard  to  the  last  three, 
but  in  respect  of  the  first  two  is  sadly  at  fault.  It  is  both 
defective  and  redundant.  Each  of  the  vowels  represents 
several  sounds.  Ears  and  speakers  differ,  but  a  considerable 
number  are  easily  distinguished. 

A  has  distinct  sounds  in  amaranth,  far,  fall,  wander,  fare, 
and  fame. 

E  is  variously  pronounced  in  met,  meet,  there,  and  perfect, 
while  in  such  words  as  perm,it  and  sujfer  it  has  an  obscure 
sound  scarcely  distinguishable  from  a  very  short  u. 

I  has  three  well  defined  sounds,  in  pin,  pine,  and  pique,  to 
which  some  add  pirn,  girl,  and  alienate. 

O  has  four  distinct  sounds,  in  dot,  dome,  done,  do,  and  a 
fifth  tolerably  distinct  in  wolf,  to  which  some  add  a  sixth  in 
form. 

U  is  variously  heard  in  rust,  rule,  full,  mule,  busy,  and 
burial,  to  which  some  add  turn. 

V  differs  in  pyx,  pyet,  myrtle,  plenty,  and  yet,  and  some  say 
in  hyrse. 

W  is  treated  as  interchangeably  vowel  or  consonant.  I  am 
unable  to  perceive  in  it  anything  but  the  sound  of  u  in  rule 
pronounced  with  varying  degrees  of  quickness  and  force.  To 
my  ear  the  difference  between  the  short  sound  of  a  vowel 

'  This  curious  spelling  was  retained  in  a  few  words  in  Scotland  as  long  as  the 
Scottish  dialect  was  spoken.  As  an  example,  spuhie  or  spuilzie  (Scott's  "  Wa- 
verley,"  chap.  48.)  was  pronounced  spool-ye.  The  late  Saxon  character  for  ^  had, 
however,  begun  to  be  mistaken  for  z  by  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century. 


124  ^^  English  Language. 

and  the  prolongation  induced  by  a  succeeding  r — between 
then  and  there,  or  but  and  burn — is  only  one  of  duration.  I 
see  no  greater  difference  than  between  the  s  in  sun  and  that 
in  hiss,  or  the  /  in  pale  and  in  pull.  At  the  same  time  I  dis- 
tinguish two  shades  of  the  long  i  or  y  in  fine  and  in  fire  in 
fiy  and  in  try. 

There  is  a  kind  of  personal  equation  in  this  matter,  as  I 
sometimes  detect  differences  unperceived  by  many  others, 
and  still  oftener  fail  to  perceive  distinctions  generally  recog- 
nized. 

C  performs  triple  duty  in  case,  cease,  and  chess,  to  which 
we  may  add  its  use  in  spacious  and  machine. 

F  is  pronounced  differently  in  ^^and  of. 

G  is  said  to  be  hard  in  get,  and  soft  in  gem. 

H  is  employed  in  producing  six  sounds  or  combinations 
in  hair,  share,  chair,  sphere,  there,  and  thorn. 

L  and  N,  when  combined  with  i,  as  in  salient  and  lenient, 
yield  peculiar  sounds  that  may  be  attributed  either  to  the 
consonant  or  the  vowel. 

Pis  employed  to  produce  two  different  sounds  \n periphery. 

S  stands  for  two  sounds  in  dose  and  rose,  and  combined 
with  i  it  yields  two  others — really  simple  sounds — in  mission 
BXid  fusion,  the  former  of  which  is  also  produced  by  sh. 

T  performs  fourfold  duties  in  time,  thin,  thine,  and  station. 

Z  in  azimuth  differs  from  the  same  letter  in  azure. 

Our  alphabet  is  further  defective  in  having  no  single  char- 
acters for  the  sounds  which  we  represent  by  sh,  by  th,  and 
by  the  ^  in  azure. 

It  is  redundant  in  that  c,  q,  and  x  are  superfluous.  In  call 
and  cell,  c  could  be  replaced  by  k  and  s.  In  chair  the  ch  is 
indeed  a  compound,  but  it  is  wrongly  compounded,  the  real 
elements  being  t  and  the  sound  which  we  usually  express  by 
sh.  It  is  obvious  that  q  might  always  be  replaced  by  either 
k  or  kw,  and  x  by  ks  or  gs. 

J  is  not  redundant,  since  we  have  nothing  to  take  its  place, 
but  it  is  a  malformation.  It  should  be  d,  followed  by  some 
character  having  the  value  of  the  French  /,  or  the  zhivete  of 
the  Russians. 


The  Alphabet.        ^  125 

A  great  number  of  anomalies,  as  ph,  ew  in  sew,  eau  in 
beauty,  are  not  defects  of  the  alphabet,  but  irrational 
spelling. 

Speech  is  produced  by  a  mechanism  combining  the  lead- 
ing features  of  the  reed  organ  and  the  bagpipe.  The  lungs 
are  the  reservoir  from  which  the  air  is  urged  through  the 
flexible  trachea,  or  windpipe,  by  the  muscles  of  the  chest 
and  abdomen.  The  larynx  and  mouth,  with  their  great 
powers  of  modulation,  roughly  correspond  to  the  chanter  of 
the  Highland  pipes,  and  the  nasal  passages  may  represent 
the  accompanying  drones.  On  the  upper  extremity  of  the 
windpipe  is  placed  the  valved  box  called  the  larynx — the 
special  organ  of  voice.  It  is  composed  essentially  of 
four  cartilages,  four  ligamentous  bands,  the  lid  called  the 
epiglottis,  and  an  exceedingly  delicate  arrangement  of  mus- 
cular and  other  tissues,  too  intricate  to  be  described  here. 
The  lowest  cartilage,  forming  the  base  of  the  larynx,  is 
called  the  cricoid,  meaning  ring-shaped.  It  is  but  little  modi- 
fied from  the  rings  that  compose  the  trachea.  It  is  con- 
siderably higher  behind  than  in  front.  Upon  this  rests  the 
thyroid,  or  shield-shaped  cartilage,  composed  of  two  plates, 
united  at  an  acute  angle  in  front,  so  that  a  horizontal  section 
would  resemble  the  letter  v.  The  angle  makes  a  carinate 
projection  in  front,  easily  felt  by  the  hand  in  the  upper  part 
of  the  throat,  and  is  popularly  called  Adam's  apple,  from  a 
conceit  that  the  forbidden  fruit  not  only  stuck  in  the  throat 
of  our  first  parent,  but  still  inheres  in  all  his  descendants. 
The  thyroid  forms  the  greater  part  of  the  front  and  lateral 
walls  of  the  larynx,  but  its  ends  do  not  meet  posteriorly. 
Each  extremity  has  two  projections,  termed  horns,  the  one 
extending  upward,  the  other  downward.  The  lower  ones 
articulate  with  the  cricoid,  leaving  between  the  two  carti- 
lages an  open  space  in  front  and  considerable  freedom  of 
motion.  Upon  the  posterior  part  of  the  upper  edge  of  the 
cricoid,  articulate  two  small  bodies  called  the  arytenoid,  or 
ladle-shaped  cartilages.  By  means  of  their  controlling  nerves 
and  muscles,  they  admit  of  great  celerity  and  delicacy  of 
movement.     From  the  last-named  cartilages  to  the  angle  of 


126  The  English  Language. 

the  thyroid  extend  two  pairs  of  ligamentous  bands,  one  pair 
at  a  little  distance  above  the  other.  The  lower  are  known 
as  the  inferior  or  true  vocal  cords.  They  serve  the  same 
purpose  as  the  reed  or  tongue  in  an  organ  pipe,  and  are  the 
immediate  determinants  of  the  tone  or  pitch  of  the  voice. 
When  they  are  quiescent,  the  space  between  them,  called 
the  glottis,  rima  glottidis,  or  chink  of  the  glottis,  forms  a 
slender  triangle,  from  the  angle  of  the  thyroid  to  the  two 
arytenoid  cartilages ;  but  when  they  are  tightened  in  pro- 
ducing the  higher  notes,  there  remains  but  a  mere  seam,  not 
wider  than  the  thickness  of  writing  paper.  In  elocutionists, 
and  still  more  in  accomplished  singers,  these  cords  are  ad- 
justed with  marvellous  quickness  and  delicacy  to  produce 
the  various  tones.  Without  them  there  is  no  voice.  In 
whispering  they  do  not  vibrate.  That  is  breath  made  articu- 
late, but  not  vocal,  and  may  be  imitated  without  allowing 
any  air  to  pass  through  the  glottis.  M.  Deleau  illustrated 
this  by  passing  a  current  of  air  through  the  nose  into  the 
pharynx  by  means  of  a  rubber  tube.  If  then  the  mouth 
assumed  the  successive  positions  necessary  for  articulation, 
whispering  was  heard  without  any  action  of  the  lungs  or 
larynx.  If  at  the  same  time  vocal  sound  was  uttered, 
speech  and  whispering  were  heard  simultaneously  from  the 
same  mouth.  A  little  above  the  true  are  the  false  vocal 
cords,  which  do  no  not  approach  closely,  or  in  themselves 
produce  sound.  Between  them  and  the  true  there  is  on 
each  side  a  concavity  known  as  a  pocket  or  'ventricle  of  the 
larynx — Morgagni  s  ventricles, — which  seem  to  augment  the 
voice  by  reverberation,  as  sound  is  intensified  by  partial 
inclosure  in  the  fiddle  or  the  drum.  The  piercing  cries  of 
the  howling  monkeys  are  due  to  extensions  of  these  ven- 
tricles. 

At  the  superior  margin  of  the  larynx,  held  erect  as  a  sen- 
tinel by  elastic  ligaments,  stands  the  cartilaginous  valve  or 
cover  called  the  epiglottis,  which  falls  like  an  automatic  draw- 
bridge when  anything  is  to  be  swallowed. 

Above  the  larynx,  the  pharynx  extends  about  four  inches 
toward  the  base  of  the  skull.     It  is  a  muscular  sac,  serving 


The  Alphabet,  127 

somewhat  the  same  purpose  as  the  air  reservoir  in  a  forcing 
pump,  as  well  as  that  of  the  reverberating  pipe  of  a  wind  in- 
strument. It  is  the  common  meeting-place  of  seven  passages 
— the  aesophagus  and  windpipe  below,  the  mouth  anteriorly, 
and  at  its  upper  part  the  nostrils  and  Eustachian  tubes  that 
lead  to  the  ears.  From  its  extent  and  situation,  its  muscular 
structure  and  power  of  distention  and  contraction,  the  phar- 
ynx is  of  prime  importance  in  giving  character  and  volume 
to  the  voice. 

Separating  the  cavity  of  the  pharynx  from  the  mouth  is 
the  pendent  curtain  known  as  t\iQ  soft  palate,  or  velum  palati. 
It  is  terminated  below  by  the  heart-shaped  point  called  the 
uvula  (little  grape),  is  movable  in  speaking  and  swallowing, 
and  does  not  at  any  time  form  a  perfect  closure.  It  rises  and 
sinks  in  passing  from  one  vocal  sound  to  another,  and 
aids  in  closing  the  passage  to  the  nostrils.  The  more 
accessible  parts  that  contribute  to  articulate  speech — the 
lips,  teeth,  tongue,  roof  of  the  mouth,  and  nose — need  not 
be  described. 

Some  writers  discuss  with  great  particularity  positions 
assumed  by  the  several  organs  in  speaking,  and  even  en- 
deavor to  teach  in  that  way  the  pronunciation  of  remote  and 
unknown  languages.  But  such  directions,  although  sound  in 
principle,  are  apt,  in  practice,  to  become  unintelligible  as 
soon  as  they  become  necessary,  for  the  reason  that  a  great 
part  of  these  positions  are  out  of  sight  and  unknown.  The 
reader  will  readily  admit  that  the  different  articulations  do 
depend  upon  the  movements  and  positions  of  the  organs 
above  enumerated ;  and  can  illustrate  this  to  himself  by 
pronouncing  leisurely  and  carefully  syllables  beginning  or 
ending  with  o,  00,  p,  b,  f,  v,  tn,  t,  d,  n,  k,  I,  r,  s,  and  thy  and 
watching  the  positions  assumed,  so  far  as  they  can  be 
observed. 

If  now  the  mouth  be  opened  moderately  wide,  and  the 
tongue  allowed  to  lie  flat,  so  that  the  passage  for  the  voice 
shall  be  unobstructed,  and  a  vocal  sound  be  uttered,  it  will 
be  that  of  the  a  in  far,  or  as  I  should  prefer  to  say  in  alarm  or 
Alabama.     This  may  be  regarded  as  the  fundamental  sound 


128  The  English  Language, 

of  human  speech.  It  is  the  first  utterance  of  infants,  and 
abounds  in  the  most  primitive  languages.  It  occurs  twice  in 
the  simplest  or  ground  form  of  most  Hebrew  verbs,  and  in 
Sanskrit  is  employed  about  half  as  often  as  all  other  sounds 
together.  Next  pronounce  the  word  stop,  allowing  the  pres- 
sure of  the  breath  to  cease  before  parting  the  lips  ;  otherwise 
it  will  be  pronounced,  stop-ih.  The  lips  will  be  firmly  closed 
and  all  utterance  cut  off.  A  opens  the  mouth  wide  ;  p  closes 
it  completely.  It  might  seem  at  first  sight  that  all  possible 
articulate  sounds  must  lie  between  these  extremes,  and 
might  be  arranged  in  a  series.  And  as  every  space  is  infi- 
nitely divisible,  if  only  the  divisions  be  infinitesimal,  there 
is  theoretically  no  limit  to  the  number  of  intermediate 
sounds.  The  greater  the  number,  however,  the  less  dis- 
tinguishable. The  number  really  found  in  different  lan- 
guages and  dialects,  and  in  local  and  personal  peculiarities  of 
utterance,  is  very  great.  Mr.  A.  J.  Ellis  has  devised  an 
alphabet  which  he  thinks  capable  of  representing  the 
sounds  of  all  known  languages.  It  consists  of  270  letters ; 
and  the  Standard  Alphabet  of  Lepsius  contains  172 
besides  the  tones  of  the  Chinese  and  the  clicks  of  the 
Hottentots. 

But  may  there  not  be  other  closures  of  the  outlet  for  the 
voice  besides  the  one  above  described  ?  In  point  of  fact 
there  are  in  English  two  others,  observable  in  pronouncing 
pit  and  pick.  One  free  passage,  therefore,  is  contrasted  with 
three  complete  closures,  and  articulate  sounds  might  be 
exhibited  in  three  lines  diverging  from  a  point  in  common. 
Such  an  arrangement  is  by  no  means  new,  and  has  been 
veiy  fully  presented  by  Professor  Whitney  in  his  Sanskrit 
Grammar,  and  other  publications,  and  in  a  manner  not 
widely  different  from  the  following. 

The  letters  within  brackets  represent  sounds  not  now  in 
the  English  language. 

The  diacritic  marks  attached  to  the  vowels  are  those  used 
in  Webster's  Dictionary. 

The  prolongation  of  a  vowel  is  not  regarded  as  a  difference 
of  sound. 


The  Alphabet. 


129 


I 

a     a 

2 

e  a   6    a 

3 

a         a 

6 

-  vowels 

4 

vocal  " 

\ 

e 

u 

5 

e 

[a] 

u 

6 

y 

rl 

w    semi- vowels ' 

7 

.  9  ng 

n 

m  nasals 

8 

voiceless 

h 

breathing 

9 
10 

vocal 
voiceless 

zh 
sh 

z 

s 

•  sibilants 

conso- 
"  nants 

II 
12 

vocal 
voiceless 

[gh] 
[ch] 

dh 
th 

)r  spirants 

13 

14 

vocal 
voiceless 

g 
k 

d 

t 

\  mutes 
P  ) 

P 

alatals 

linguals 

labials 

Words  that  will  illustrate  the  sounds  represented  in  the 
several  lines  are : 


1  alarm 

2  let,  care,  not,  awe 

3  bane,  bun,  bone 

4  bit,  bird,  bull 

5  be,  German  iiber,  rule 

6  yet,  ray,  lay,  way 

7  onion,  singing,  nun,  mum 


8  heigh-ho 

9  azure,  ooze 

10  hashish,  sister 

11  Arabic  Ghizeh,  thy,  vow 

12  German  noch,  thin,  fife 

13  grog,  deed,  babe 

14  kick,  tight,  peep 


The  u  in  mule  and  the  i  in  fire  have  been  omitted  because 
both  are  composite  sounds.  The  former  =  yu,  and  the  latter 
is  composed  of  the  first  vowels  on  the  first  and  fifth  lines. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  sounds  of  u  in  btin  and  i  in  bird 
occupy  the  centre  of  the  triangle  of  vowels.  They  are  indis- 
tinct sounds  that  have  been  compared  to  the  gray  among 
colors.  All  short,  unaccented  vowels  tend  to  degenerate  into 
these  obscure  sounds.  Observe  what  there  is  of  vowel  sound 
9 


130  The  English  Language. 

in  the  last  syllables  of  circular,  paper,  pallor,  pillar,  or  the 
second  of  atrophy,  harmony. 

As  this  is  the  first  instance  where  a  classification  has  been 
necessary,  it  may  be  as  well  to  remark  once  for  all  that  in 
nearly  every  attempt  to  classify  a  number  of  things  some  will 
be  found  to  have  claims  on  more  than  one  class.  The  claims 
may  be  so  nearly  equal  that  to  locate  them  anywhere  will  be 
an  arbitrary  sacrifice  of  principle  to  convenience.  The  oldest 
and  most  familiar  division  of  letters  is  into  vowels  and 
consonants,  but  then  come  the  semi-vowels  between.  F  is 
properly  enough  classed  with  the  labials.  It  is  produced  by 
emitting  the  breath  through  the  slight  chink  left  in  bringing 
together  the  lower  lip  and  the  upper  teeth.  It  is  therefore 
nearly  as  much  due  to  the  teeth  as  to  the  lips.  So  the  nasals 
are  not  produced  by  the  nose,  but  only  with  its  assistance. 
Indeed,  very  few  are  formed  without  the  combined  action  of 
two  or  more  organs.  R  may  be  pronounced  as  a  pure 
lingual  when  the  tongue  is  raised  and  made  to  vibrate  with 
the  passing  vocal  breath  but  does  not  touch  the  teeth  or 
palate. 

The  vowels  are  uninterrupted  emissions  of  voice.  The 
passage  varies  in  form  with  each,  but  is  unobstructed. 

The  experiments  made  by  Helmholtz  and  Koenig  with 
graduated  tuning-forks  show  that  the  vowels,  as  uttered  by 
the  same  voice,  are  separated  by  regular  musical  intervals. 
As  pronounced  in  North  Germany,  Koenig  found  the  num- 
ber of  vibrations  to  be  approximately : 

u  o  a  e  i 

450  900  1,800  3,600  7,200. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  old  grammarians  of  India 
regarded  <?  as  a  union  of  a  and  u,  and  ^  as  a  combination  of 
a  and  /.     (See  Coinptes  Rendus,  April  25,  1870.) 

The  term  consonant  signifies  sounding  along  with,  as  if  in- 
capable of  utterance  without  vowels ;  but  the  sibilants  cer- 
tainly need  none,  and  scarcely  do  the  spirants,  and  /  and  r 
are  in  some  languages  treated  as  vowels.  We  might  say, 
then,  generally  that  consonants  are  the  result  of  arresting  or 


The  Alphabet  131 

obstructing  the  voice  or  breath  ;  but  in  that  case  what  should 
we  say  of  h,  which  is  voiceless,  and  in  the  formation  of  which 
the  breath  is  neither  stopped  nor  impeded  ?  Still,  it  is  true 
of  all  other  consonants,  and  they  naturally  divide  themselves 
into  those  in  which  there  is  complete  closure  and  those  that 
require  only  various  degrees  of  obstruction.  This  is  there- 
fore a  division  into  momentary  and  continuous  sounds,  the 
former  of  which  are  sometimes  called  explosives,  and  some- 
times mutes.  They  are  further  distinguished  into  those 
requiring  the  exercise  of  the  voice  and  those  produced  by 
mere  voiceless  breath.  The  former  are  often  termed  sonants 
and  the  latter  surds.  Strong  and  weak  would  seem  to  be 
more  expressive.  This  distinction,  in  the  case  of  the  mutes, 
is  that  with  the  weak  the  closure  is  made  or  broken  instan- 
taneously without  any  accompanying  vocal  murmur,  while 
an  initial  strong  mute  is  preceded,  and  a  final  one  followed, 
by  a  brief  resonance  of  the  voice  in  the  closed  cavity  of  the 
mouth  and  pharynx. 

The  want  of  a  uniform  alphabet  has  long  been  felt  by  mis- 
sionaries, travellers,  and  all  who  have  to  deal  with  languages 
that  differ  widely  from  common  European  standards. 
Among  many  attempts  at  a  uniform  system  of  writing — 
second  in  importance  only  to  a  universal  language — that  of 
A.  J.  Ellis,  called  paleotype,  and  the  Standard  Alphabet 
of  Professor  Lepsius  of  Berlin,  seem  at  present  to  be  re- 
garded with  most  favor.  The  former  is  used  to  exhibit  the 
pronunciation  in  the  great  dictionary  now  in  progress  under 
the  auspices  of  the  English  Philological  Society,  and  the 
latter  is  employed  by  the  latest  edition  of  the  "  Encyclo- 
paedia Britannica"  in  transliterating  foreign  names.  Both 
are  chargeable  with  excessive  refinement  and  hair-splitting, 
and  neither  of  them  has  been  made  at  all  intelligible  to  the 
general  reader.  For  these  reasons,  and  because  neither  of 
them  has  yet  obtained,  or  is  at  all  certain  to  obtain,  general 
acceptance,  I  shall  not  try  to  introduce  either  in  this  place, 
although  aware  that  it  is  very  annoying  for  a  reader  to  find 
his  page  filled  with  marks  to  which  he  has  no  key. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


GRIMM'S     LAW 


When  languages  closely  related  are  compared,  many 
words  are  found  in  all  that  are  much  alike,  both  in  form  and 
meaning,  yet  seldom  quite  the  same.  The  following  is  a 
very  simple   example : 


Italian 

Spanish. 

Portuguese. 

French, 

uomo 

hombre 

homem 

homme 

cavallo 

caballo 

cavallo 

cheval 

terra 

tierra 

terra 

terra 

mano 

mano 

mac 

main. 

No  one  of  these  is  an  imitation  of  another.  They  are 
the  common  offspring  of  the  Latin  homo,  a  man  ;  caballus, 
a  pack-horse  ;  terra,  the  earth  ;  and  manus,  a  hand.  There 
is  sometimes  a  kind  of  method  observable  in  this  diversity, 
Thus  we  have 


German. 

English. 

German. 

English. 

Dorn 

thorn 

Thier 

deer 

Ding 

thing 

theuer 

dear 

dick 

thick 

Thur 

door 

dun 

thin 

Thai 

dale 

durch 

through 

Theil 

deal 

Daum 

thumb 

Thau 

dew. 

In  these  and  a  multitude  of  similar  examples,  d  in  either 
language  corresponds  to  th  in  the  other. 

A  somewhat  similar  mode  of  comparison  has  been  applied 
to  the  whole  Aryan  family  of  languages,  and  especially  in 


132 


Grimms  Law.  133 

their  treatment  of  the  instantaneous,  or  mute,  consonants 
of  the  three  series  ending  in  k,  t,  and  p.  (See  page  128), 
To  these  correspond  the  sonants  g,  d,  b.  Each  of  these  six 
may  be  aspirated  ;  but  all  the  aspirates  are  seldom  found  in 
any  one  language.     The  complete  series  would  stand  thus  : 


k 

kh 

.    g 

gh 

t 

th 

d 

dh 

P 

ph 

b 

bh 

in  which  kk  would  be  pronounced  somewhat  as  in  bulkhead, 
gh  as  in  big-horn,  etc.  Of  the  members  now  known,  Sanskrit 
alone  has  all  the  twelve  sounds,  but  makes  comparatively 
little  use  of  the  lighter  aspirates  kh,  th,  ph,  while  the  graver 
gh,  dh,  and  bh  occur  very  often.  Ancient  Greek  had  the 
lighter  set,  X7  ^y  V  7  Latin  and  the  other  members  generally 
were  without  any.  As  Sanskrit  is  the  best  preserved,  we 
may  suppose  that  the  common  mother  tongue  of  all  had 
these  twelve  consonants.  If  now  words  containing  all  of 
these  were  inherited  by  each  of  the  descendants,  what  were 
they  to  do  with  them,  when  they  had  dropped  or  forgotten 
part  of  the  constituent  sounds.  Their  case  would  not  be 
very  unlike  the  problem  of  placing  twelve  guests  in  eight  or 
nine  single  beds.  In  fact,  they  would  often  put  two  in  a 
bed,  and  perhaps  sometimes  on  the  principle  of  first  come 
first  served.     The  Greek,  the  second  best  appointed,  would 

use  X  foi"  k^^  ^^*i  S^^^  -^  fo^  ^^^  ^"*^  ^^^1  ^'^^  V  iov  ph  and  bh. 
Latin,  having  no  aspirates,  replaced  them  imperfectly  by 
h  and  f,  and  occasionally  by  d  and  b.  As  an  illustration  of 
the  effect  we  may  take  a  word,  or  rather  words,  very  familiar 
to  the  Latin  scholar — do,  dare,  dedi,  datum,  and  its  real  or 
apparent  compounds,  ab-do,  ad-do,  circum-do,  con-do,  sub-do,  etc. 
In  the  simple  word  do  signifies  give ;  in  the  compounds 
cited,  put  or  place.  To  all  appearance  they  are  the  same 
word,  and  have  been  generally  so  regarded ;  but  they  are 
really  different,  and  correspond  to  the  Sanskrit  da,  give,  and 
dha,  place.  The  Greek,  though  unable  to  preserve  them 
perfectly,  could  still  keep  them  distinct  as  didomi  and 
tithemi. 


134  ^^  English  Language. 

We  may  now  do  as  the  Greeks  did,  reduce  the  twelve 
consonants  to  nine,  bearing  in  mind  that  the  aspirates, 
kh,  th,  pk,  were  comparatively  little  used  in  Sanskrit,  while 
gh,  dh,  and  bh  were  very  common.  We  will  also  premise 
that  Gothic  will  be  cited  as  the  oldest  representative  of  a 
numerous  secondary  family,  embracing  Frisian,  Norse,  Ice- 
landic, Danish,  Swedish,  Dutch,  Saxon,  English.  The  gen- 
eral system  of  corresponding  sounds  may  then  be  represented 
in  tabular  form.  The  first  line  gives  the  sounds  as  spoken 
by  the  ancient  Hindoos,  the  second  those  uttered  by  the 
Greeks  in  derivatives  from  the  same  words,  the  third  those 
of  the  Latin  tongue,  etc. 

This  table  exhibits  in  condensed  form  what  is  known  as 
Grimm's  Law,  which  may  be  further  illustrated  by  tracing  a 
few  words  through  their  principal  transformations. 

Sanskrit  kal,  to  cover  or  hide  ;  Greek  kalia,  a  shelter ; 
Latin  celare,  to  conceal ;  Irish  calla,  a  hood  ;  Anglo-Saxon 
iielan,  to  hide  ;  English  hell,  hole,  heal,  hull. 

Sansk.  tan,  to  stretch ;  Gr.  tein-ein,  to  stretch  ;  Lat. 
ten-uis,  stretched  thin  ;  Ir.  tan-aigh ;  Goth,  than-jan ;  Eng. 
thin  ;  Old  High  German  diinni ;  Modern  H.  G.  diinn. 

Sansk.  pad,  go ;  Gr.  pod-,  Lat.  pcd-,  a  foot ;  Goth. 
fot-u  ;  A.-S.  fdt ;  Eng.  foot ;  O.  H.  G.  Vuoss ;  Mod.  Ger. 
fuss. 

Sansk.  gan,  to  generate  ;  Gr.  gen-os,  kind  ;  gen-esis,  origin  ; 
gyn-e,  a  woman;  Lat.  gen-it  or ;  Irish  gean ;  Welsh  ^^«-?/ 
Goth,  kwens,  kwein-s,  kwin-o,  a  woman  ;  Icel.  kon-a  ;  A.-S. 
cw^n  ;  Eng.  queen  and  quean  ;  also  Eng.  kin,  kin-dred,  kin-d ; 
O.  H.  G.  khind,  a  child ;  Mod.  H.  G.  Kin-d. 

Sansk.  dant,  a  tooth ;  Gr.  o-dont ;  Lat.  dent ;  Welsh 
dant ;  Goth,  tunth  ;  Lithuanian  dantis  ;  Old  Saxon,  Dutch, 
Dan.,  Swed.,  tand ;  Icel.  tonn,  for  tannr  ^=  tand-r ;  A.-S. 
tdth  ;  Eng.  tooth  ;  H.  G.  zahn. 

Few  words  in  Sanskrit  begin  with  b  ;  few  in  Saxon  and 
none  in  Gothic,  with  the  corresponding/. 

Sansk.  ghama,  the  earth ;  Gr.  cham-ai,  Lat.  humi,  on 
the  ground  ;  Rus.  zemlia,  land  ;  Lat.  homo,  Goth,  guma,  a 
man,  a  son  of  earth  ;  A.-S.  bryd-gtima,  a  bridegroom. 


43 
Oh 


Grimins  Law,  135 


^        ^       ^        '^        ^        jn 


a. 


T3  «0  TJ  'O  'O  TS 


N 

N 

biO 

>s 

tJ3 

b;3 

bi 

bi 

^ 

u 

ex. 

k 

o, 

rv-. 

a, 

O. 

XI 

^ 

•.►m" 

•T3 


-o 


cr       ^       ^        ^         t^        bi 


^"^       -^ 


^  Q^O-js^XiXi  Ou, 


s^ 

^ 

X! 
T3 

<^ 

S- 

-a 

•O 

-o 

-0 

-M 

X" 

v*^ 

•*-> 

^_^ 

^_^ 

X5 

> 

" 

bJ5 

N 

N 

bjo 

>< 

fcij 

^ 

^ 

ho 

^ 

vi-T 

bxi 

b/3 

J3 

^ 

^ 

x: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

c 

rt 

rt 

• 

• 

• 

u 

C 

. 

a 

C 

nS 

«j 

w 

sx 

0 
> 

3 

4-1 

0 

• 

* 

03 

■*-> 

^ 

c: 

t— I 

C?} 

J 

<J 

ffi 

C 

4J 

4-> 

T3 

-o 

-a 

-M 

-o 

rt 

>-■ 

'A 

0 

CO 

0 

A 

0 

r^. 

0 

0 

0 

136 


The  English  Language. 


Sansk.  dhran,  to  sound  ;  Gr.  thren-os ;  Goth,  drun-yas ; 
\ce\.  dryn-ja  ;  A.-S,  drdn  ;  Rng.  drone. 

Sansk.  d/iu,  to  exist  ;  Gr.  e-phu,  he  was  ;  Lat.  fu-i,  I  was ; 
Welsh  bu ;  Irish  bi ;  Lith.  bu-ti,  to  be;  Goth,  bau-an,  to 
dwell ;  A.-S.  beo-n  ;  Eng.  be  ;  Germ.  bi-n. 

If  we  now  take  a  somewhat  narrower  view  of  the  subject, 
and  confine  ourselves  a  moment  to  the  Teutonic  sub-family, 
we  shall  find  that  it  naturally  falls  into  either  two  or  three 
divisions,  as  we  may  regard  them.  High  German ;  Low 
German,  Low  Dutch  or  Piatt  Deutsch  ;  and  Scandinavian. 
The  Scandinavian  branch  comprises  the  Old  Norse,  as  the 
parent  of  the  others,  and  the  modern  Icelandic,  Danish,  and 
Swedish.  Their  most  marked  peculiarities  are  a  suffixed 
article  and  a  reflexive  form  of  the  verb.  The  definite  arti- 
cle is  attached  to  the  noun.     Thus  in  Icelandic  : 


madhr 

a  man 

madhr-inn 

the  man 

sonr 

a  son 

sonr-inn 

the  son 

vetr 

winter 

vetr-inn 

the  winter 

hridh 

a  storm 

hridh-in 

the  storm 

holt 

a  copsewood 

holt-itt 

the  coppice 

The  reflexive,  or  passive,  form  of  the  verb  is  made  by 
appending  a  fragment  of  a  pronoun  signifying  self — Icel. 
gremja,  to  vex  ;  greinja-sk,  to  vex  one's  self,  to  be  angry.  In 
Danish  nothing  remains  of  the  pronoun  except  the  letter  s. 


at  give  to  give 

at  elske  to  love 

at  finde  to  find 

at  faae  to  get 

at  drive  to  drive 


at  give-s  to  be  given 

at  elske-s  to  be  loved 

at  finde-s  to  be  found 

at  faae-s  to  be  gotten 

at  drive- s  to  be  driven 


In  other  respects  these  languages  belong  to  the  Low  Ger- 
man branch,  and  High  German — that  is,  the  language  of  the 
interior,  remote  from  the  sea-coast,  represented  by  the  mod- 
ern literary  German — stands  alone  in  the  transmutation  of 
sounds.  This  will  be  shown  by  exhibiting  a  few  words  in — 
1st,  Gothic;  2d,  Danish;  3d,  Swedish;  4th,  Dutch;  5th, 
English  ;  6th,  German. 


Grimms  Law. 


137 


I. 

2. 

3- 

4- 

5- 

6, 

taihun 

ti 

tio 

tien 

ten 

zehn 

timr 

timmer 

timmer 

timmer 

timber 

Zimmer 

tindan 

tender 

tindra 

tender 

tinder 

ziinden 

tungo 

tunge 

tunga 

tong 

tongue 

Zunge 

tunthus 

tand 

tand 

tand 

tooth 

Zahn 

tvai 

to 

twa 

twee 

two 

zwei 

taikns 

tegn 

tecken 

teeken 

token 

Zeichen 

tairan 

taere 

tara 

tomen 

tear 

zerren 

threis 

(Icel.)  thrir 

three 

drei 

thata 
thu 

thaursti 
than 

"  that 
"  thu 
"  thyrstr 
"  thann 

(The  sounds  of  th  are 
wanting  in  all  but  Eng- 
lish and  Icelandic. 

that 
thou 
thirst 
than,  then 

das 
Du 
Durst 
dann, denn 

thagks 

"  thakkir 

thanks 

Dank 

dags 

dag  (Dan.) 

dag 

day 

day 

Tag 

dails 

deel 

del 

deel 

deal 

Teil 

dal 

dal 

dal 

dal 

dale 

Thai 

dauhtar 

datter 

dotter 

dochter 

daughter 

Tochter 

daur 

dor 

dorr 

deur 

door 

TUre 

dragen 

drage 

draga 

dreggen 

drag 

tragen 

dreiban 

drive 

drefva 

drijven 

drive 

treiben 

It  follows  that  of  all  the  languages  of  this  sub-family  the 
literary  German  of  to-day  is  the  most  remote  from  our  own. 
The  shifting  of  consonants  is  not  confined  to  the  initial 
sounds,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  following  additional  exam- 
ples confined  to  the  English  and  German. 


crib 

Krippe 

ship 

Schiff 

double 

doppel 

sweep 

schweifen 

stubble 

Stoppel 

water 

Wasser 

lead 

leiten 

cat 

Katze 

ladder 

Leiter 

malt 

Maltz 

leaf 

Laub 

salt 

Saltz 

life 

Leben 

earth 

Erde 

calf 

Kalb 

wether 

Widder 

bridge 

Briicke 

give 

geben 

ridge 

Rucken 

love 

Liebe 

CHAPTER  VII. 
PRONUNCIATION  AND  SPELLING. 

It  is  not  the  intention  here  to  show  how  all  words  should 
be  written  and  spoken.  For  information  on  these  points,  as 
on  many  others,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  dictionaries ; 
but  as  our  spelling  is  admitted  to  abound  in  anomalies  it  is 
my  purpose  to  make  these  a  little  more  intelligible,  by  show- 
ing how  some  of  them  arose. 

This  chapter  has  been  headed  advisedly,  Pronunciation 
and  Spelling,  thus  giving  the  spoken  word  precedence  over 
the  written,  contrary  to  what  I  suppose  to  be  the  popular 
judgment.  Languages  are  spoken  long  before  they  are  writ- 
ten. Very  few  are  written  yet  to  any  considerable  extent. 
Were  it  possible  to  take  an  account  of  the  words  spoken 
and  written  on  any  one  day,  I  doubt  not  the  former  would 
outnumber  the  latter  a  hundred  to  one.  Writing  is  to 
speech  as  a  portrait  to  the  living  face — an  attempt  to  repre- 
sent and  perpetuate  a  perishable  original.  A  man  may  not 
look  like  his  portrait,  but  in  that  case  which  is  correct  ?  Our 
aim  should  be  not  to  pronounce  as  we  spell,  but  to  spell  as 
we  pronounce. 

Pronunciation  and  spelling  agree  and  are  consistent  when 
the  same  written  signs — no  matter  what  they  may  be — al- 
ways represent  the  same  sounds.  They  disagree  when  the 
same  characters  are  assigned  to  different  sounds,  or  different 
characters  by  turns  to  the  same  sounds.  The  English  c  and 
g  represent  at  least  two  unlike  sounds  each,  while  f,  ff,  gh, 
and  pk  are  used  for  the  same  sound.  Twelve  different  com- 
binations are  put  for  the  vowel  sound  heard  mpeel,  and  eleven 

138 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  1 39 

for  that  in  no.  In  though  half  the  word  is  in  the  position  of 
a  representative  without  a  constituency,  and  the  g  in  gaol 
is  a  peculiar  and  solitary  exception.  There  is  not  a  single 
letter  in  our  alphabet  that  always  stands  for  the  same  sound. 
R  comes  the  nearest  to  it ;  but  in  regard  to  that  letter  there 
is  considerable  diversity  both  in  theory  and  practice,  and  it 
seems  in  danger  of  being  entirely  lost. 

In  looking  for  the  cause  of  these  divergences  we  observe 
that  people  do  not  all  pronounce  alike,  even  when  brought 
up  amid  the  same  surroundings.  Minute  peculiarities  of 
organization  combine  with  diversities  of  tastes,  associations, 
and  pursuits  to  produce  dialectic  differences  of  localities, 
families,  classes,  and  trades.  Webster's  Dictionary  gives 
a  list  of  1,275  words  in  the  pronunciation  of  which 
authorities  are  not  agreed  ;  and  the  differences  among  these 
experts  are  sometimes  quite  considerable.  Again,  our  ears 
agree  about  as  little  as  our  tongues.  If  a  foreigner  were  to 
recite  to  a  hundred  persons  a  sentence  of  say  twenty  words 
in  his  native  tongue  and  manner,  to  which  all  were  strangers, 
and  they  were  to  take  the  words  down  from  his  dictation, 
they  would  undoubtedly  make  a  hundred  discordant  reports. 
In  the  third  place,  with  a  system  of  writing  like  ours,  persons 
left  to  their  own  unaided  judgment  will  differ  much  in  their 
application  of  letters  to  express  sounds.  In  examining  many 
letters  from  various  parts  of  Europe  and  America — some  of 
them  wonderfully  spelled, — I  have  had  the  curiosity  to  note 
in  how  many  ways  the  same  word  would  be  written,  and  I 
have  found  210  variant  attempts  to  write  the  single  word  com- 
mutation, all  in  good  faith  and  under  circumstances  to  put 
the  writers  on  their  best  behavior. 

Moreover,  when  words  are  once  committed  to  writing  they 
remain  in  that  form  to  be  read  for  centuries,  while  living 
speech  moves  away,  leaving  them  behind  like  old  water- 
marks, showing  the  former  course  of  an  ever-shifting  stream. 
And  this  is  the  principal  cause  of  the  divergence  between 
pronunciation  and  spelling.  When  Butler  celebrates  the 
linguistic  acquirements  of  Hudibras  he  represents  that  his 
hero — 


140  The  English  Language. 

**  made  some  think  when  he  did  gabble, 
Th'  had  heard  three  laborers  of  Babel, 
Or  Cerberus  himself  pronounce 
A  leash  of  languages  at  once." 

These  now  seem  poor  rhymes  ;  but  when  men  said  Bab-el 
and  promince  they  were  perfect. 

Finally,  if  a  set  of  characters  were  invented  expressly  for 
one  language  of  few  and  simple  sounds,  the  adaptation  might 
be  perfect  till  the  language  changed.  This  temporary  suc- 
cess was  probably  attained  by  the  Devanagari  and  Arabic 
alphabets  and  the  Japanese  and  Cherokee  syllabaries.  An 
Indian  chief  is  said  to  have  written  a  letter  in  the  last-named 
characters  the  day  he  first  saw  them,  so  easy  it  is  to  learn 
a  system  at  once  simple  and  self-consistent.  But  a  bor- 
rowed alphabet,  like  a  borrowed  coat,  is  very  apt  to  be  a 
misfit. 

Now  to  apply  these  general  considerations  to  our  mother 
tongue,  we  learn  that  in  Saxon  England  considerable  diver- 
sities of  speech  prevailed,  whence  probably  originated  the 
present  rustic  dialects.  Among  these,  through  the  political 
ascendancy  of  Wessex  and  the  learning  and  patriotic  labors 
of  King  Alfred,  West-Saxon  attained  a  temporary  suprem- 
acy and  has  been  regarded  as  the  typical  Anglo-Saxon.  The 
Angles  and  Saxons  had  come  from  the  shores  of  the  North 
Sea  as  unlettered  pagans.  The  religion  and  civilization  of 
the  Mediterranean  coasts  were  brought  to  them  by  Christian 
missionaries.  Their  runes  and  beechen  tablets  where  ex- 
changed for  Roman  letters,  parchment,  pens,  and  ink.  In 
adapting  the  new  alphabet  to  their  wants  they  rejected  k, 
q,  and  z,  and  they  did  not  distinguish  J  from  i  or  v  from  u. 
They  retained  an  old  rune  to  represent  the  sound  of  th  in 
thin,  and  crossed  a  d  {jS)  for  the  th  in  then,  as  the  Romans 
had  no  way  of  expressing  these  sounds.  They  introduced  w 
with  the  same  power  as  at  present.  Setting  aside  minor 
distinctions  of  different  writers,  the  Anglo-Saxon  alphabet 
represented  the  following  sounds  : 


Pronunciation  and  spelling.  141 

A,  as  in  hart ;  never  as  in  hate  or  hare  ;  d,  as  in  hall,  or  as  in 

far. 

B,  as  in  babe. 

C,  "  "   case  J  never  as  in  cease  or  cheese. 

D,  "  "    deed. 

E,  "  "   men;  /,  as  a  in  mane ;  indistinct  when  final,  but  not 

silent. 

F,  as  nearly  v  as  possible. 

G,  as  in  go,  not  as  in  gin  ;  like  7  before  e  and  /. 

H,  "  "  home,  when  initial ;  in  the  middle  or  end  of  a  syllable, 
like  the  German  or  Scotch  ch — the  lost  sound  of 
English. 

I,  as  in  tin  ;  t,  as  in  mach/«^. 

L,  M,  N,  as  at  present. 

O,  d,  as  in  Soho  ! 

P,  as  in  puppet,  but  rarely  beginning  native  words. 

R,  trilled,  or  fully  sounded. 

S,  as  s,  when  double,  or  when  preceded  or  followed  by  c,  p,  or 
t ;  otherwise  like  z. 

T,  as  at  present. 

U,  like  the  vowels  in  cuckoo. 

W,  as  at  present — never  silent. 

X,  seldom  used,  and  then  as  a  monogram  for  hs,  or  an  ana- 
gram for  sc. 

Y,  J ,  as  the  French  u  and  the  German  ii. 

Th  (a  single  character)  acquired  the  two  values  of  th  in  thin 
and  in  thine. 

^  —  th'm.  thy. 

The  chief  diphthongs  were : 

ae  =  <2  in  care  ;  ce,  the  same  prolonged. 
au,  aw,  ow  =  ow  in  now. 
ie,  the  same  as  /  followed  by  a  faint  e. 

ea,  ia,  eo,  /o,  the  vowels  pronounced  separately,  with  the  prin- 
cipal stress  on  the  first. 

As  a  scheme  of  sounds,  this  alphabet  had  one  represented 
by  h,  now  lost.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  no  indication  of 
the  sounds  which  we  represent  by  J,  ch,  sh,  oi,  i  in  pine,  u 
in  mule,  II  in  million,  «  in  pinion,  z  in  azure ;  and  we  have 


142 


The  English  Language. 


many  delicate  distinctions  which  might  be  sought  for  in  vain 
in  the  primitive  language,  at  least  at  this  distance  of  time. 

Some  of  the  relations  between  pronunciation  and  spelling 
that  strike  us  now  as  most  characteristic  are  these : 

1.  Every  letter  was  sounded,  although  e  final,  or  following 
i,  had  a  tendency  to  become  indistinct  and  faint.  Initial  w 
was  pronounced  before  r  in  such  words  as  writan,  to  write ; 
zvreccan,  to  avenge ;  so  also  c  before  n,  as  in  cnif,  a  knife ; 
cnedan,  to  knead. 

2.  An  initial  h,  of  which  there  is  now  no  trace  left,  often 
preceded  /,  n,  or  r,  as  in  hldf,  bread,  a  loaf;  hltid,  loud; 
hnappian,  to  nap,  to  slumber ;  hrdf,  a  roof. 

"Tha  hnappodon  hie  ealle,  and  sl^pon.'" — Saxon  Gospels. 

3.  Czv  was  written  where  we  now  put  qu — cwic,  quick, 
alive ;  cwealm,  a  qualm,  sickness. 

4.  Our  ancestors  wrote  hiv  where  we  absurdly  write  wh — 
hwd,  who  ;  kwcEt,  what ;  hwcether^  whether. 

From  Saxon  times  to  ours  there  has  been  incessant  change 
— now  rapid,  now  slow,  but  always  change.  The  general 
tendency  of  the  change,  as  shown  in  the  chapter  on  the 
formation  of  words,  has  been  to  shorten  and  simplify — to 
make  speech  easier.  It  has  been  said  that  the  words  used 
by  the  older  nations  were  a  great  deal  too  long.  In  these 
busy  ages  we  have  had  to  shorten  many  of  them.  Take  the 
following  as  examples : 


andswarian 

to  answer 

gegadrian 

to  gather 

seghwsether 

either 

cyning 

a  king 

setspeornan 

to  spurn 

butan 

but 

aheardian 

to  harden 

betweonan 

between 

beheafdian 

to  behead 

hlaford ' 

lord 

afhreowan 

to  rue 

hlafdige  * 

lady 

nase-thyrel 

nostril 

wff-man 

woman 

'  Then  they  all  napped  and  slept. 

'  The  derivation  of  these  two  interesting  words  is  uncertain.  The  first  part 
is  clearly  hlhf,  bread  ;  ord  is  probably  a  contraction  for  weard,  a  guard  ;  and 
digi  may  be  allied  to  the  Gothic  digan,  to  knead,  prepare  bread.  On  this  sup- 
position lady  would  have  meant  once,  bread-maker,  and  lord  bread-protector. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  143 

For  ages  spelling  was  quite  irregular.  The  Saxon  word 
to  ask  is  found  in  the  forms :  ascian,  ahsian,  acsian,  axian, 
acsigan,  axigean.  In  the  absence  of  all  authoritative  stand- 
ards, each  writer  made  his  own  spelling  as  he  went  along. 
It  was  quite  common  to  write  the  same  word  differently  even 
in  the  same  sentence.  Some  words  had  at  least  two  pro- 
nunciations, and  a  still  greater  number  of  spellings — a  con- 
siderable convenience  in  versification.  This  fluctuating 
orthography  continued  till  the  sixteenth  century,  and  has 
not  yet  entirely  disappeared.  Edmund  Paston,  writing  to 
his  wife  in  the  year  of  the  discovery  of  America,  called  her 
indifferently  his  wyve,  wyffe,  wyveffe,  or  wyffve;  while  the 
good  dame  subscribes  herself  with  phonetic  brevity :  "  Your 
yf,  M.  P."  Personal  names  have  been  the  most  cruelly 
treated.  The  acts  of  their  martyrdom  test  the  power  of 
believing.  The  editors  of  "  Webster's  Dictionary "  assert 
that  the  name  of  Mainwaring  is  written  131  different  ways 
in  the  family  documents.  But  for  the  last  three  hundred 
years  spelling  has  been  becoming  both  more  simple  and  more 
uniform.  The  uniformity  at  least  has  been  greatly  pro- 
moted by  the  printers,  and  the  wide  distribution  of  standard 
works  precisely  alike  in  every  letter.  There  is  no  doubt 
much  to  be  accomplished  yet,  for  in  addition  to  the  varying 
pronunciation  of  many  words,  and  the  want  of  a  constant 
agreement  between  the  written  and  spoken  language,  there 
are  many  words — Webster  gives  a  list  of  1,550 — whose 
orthography  is  unsettled. 

In  regard  to  changes  in  pronunciation  and  spelling,  four 
cases  may  be  distinguished  : 

1st.  Both  may  remain  unchanged. 

2d.  Pronunciation  may  hold  its  place,  while  the  spelling 
changes. 

3d.  The  opposite  may  take  place. 

4th.  Both  may  change  together,  or  in  diverse  directions. 
Of  these  the  first  two  are  very  rare,  the  last  two  very 
common.  Land  was  written  and  no  doubt  spoken  fifteen 
centuries  ago  as  it  is  now  ;  so  too  crisp,  den,  fox,  hand,  sandy 
timber,  and  winter  have  come  down  from  our  Saxon  fathers 


144  ^^^  English  Language. 

with  scarcely  a  shade  of  change.  Under  the  second  head, 
the  Saxons  pronounced  door  and  drink  as  we  do,  but  wrote 
them  otherwise.  As  to  the  third,  we  find,  for  example,  in  a 
credo  of  the  thirteenth  century  the  word  grace  written  as  at 
the  present  time,  but  its  pronunciation  we  would  be  apt  to 
represent  as  grassy,  also  maiden  (the  Virgin)  pronounced 
miden,  and  Pilate,  Peelahty.  The  great  body  of  the  words 
do  not  remain  the  same,  either  to  the  eye  or  the  ear. 

But  before  going  further  we  must  adopt  for  the  nonce  some 
system  for  representing  spoken  sounds.  For  the  remainder 
of  this  chapter,  therefore,  the  following  characters,  when 
placed  in  parentheses,  will  be  used  to  indicate  pronunciation, 
not  as  being  highly  consistent  or  scientific,  but  because  they 
seem  as  little  likely  as  any  to  be  misunderstood.  Mere  pro- 
longation, or  the  time  occupied  in  utterance,  will  not  be 
distinguished  into  long  and  short  when  the  sound  is  the  same. 

aa,  for  the  vowel  in  arm,  parameter. 

a,  as  in  man,  fat. 

ae,  "  "  care,  fair,  there, 

ai,  "  "  fain,  fane, 

aw,  "  "  law,  fall,  thought, 

ch,  "  "  church. 

dh,  like  th  in  this,  that. 

ee,  as  in  meet,  receive. 

e,  "  "  met. 

e,  "  "  person — neither  purson,  parson,  nor  pairson. 

f,  "  "  fluffy. 

g,  "  "  grog,  not  gin. 

h,  when  alone,  as  in  high,  hill,  but  representing  different  sounds 

when  combined,  as  in  ch,  dh,  gh,  kh,  sh,  th,  zh. 
ii,  as  in  fire,  dry,  aye. 
//,    "  "  fine,  rhyme, 
i,    "  "  tin. 
kh,  the  lost   sound  of   English — Scotch  and  German  ch. 

gh  :  kh     :   :     g     :     k. 
oa,  the  vowel  in  moan,  loan,  lone,  lo,  low,  though, 
o,  not. 

oe,     "       "       "  girl,  pearl,  berth. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling,  145 

oi,  as  in  toil,  toy. 
ow,    "  "  house,  owl,  bough. 

r,  distinctly  sounded,  not  reduced  to  h,  w,  or  nothing, 
sh,  as  in  shallowish. 
th,    "  "  thin, 
uu,    "  "  rule,  food,  two,  through. 

u,    "  "  but,  flood. 

u,    "  "  full,  put,  foot, 
ue,  the  French  u,  or  the  German  it. 
yu,  the  u  in  mule,  use,  few. 

y,  as  in  yoke  ;  when  final  and  unaccented,  as  in  penny, 
zh,  like  the  J  in  pleasure,  the  z  in  azure. 

This  is  but  a  rough  scale  of  sounds  easily  distinguished. 
Those  who  have  made  a  life-study  of  orthoepy  discover  a 
great  number  of  intermediate  shades  that  elude  the  common 
sense  and  sometimes  perplex  the  professional  ear.  The  most 
laborious  investigator,  Mr.  A.  J.  Ellis,  thus  recapitulates  the 
results  of  analyses  of  long  i,  as  represented  by  different 
authors : 

"  Sheridan  and  Knowles  Ai 

Haldeman  a\ 

Walker  and  Melville  Bell  ai     accented 

Melville  Bell  ahi  unaccented 

Londoners  aei 
Scotch                  e\,  ei,  Ei,  a\,  ahi 

Wilkins  and  Franklin  ai 

Wallis  and  Smart  3oi  * 

Now  this  being  the  sound  of  the  personal  pronoun,  is  heard  every 
day,  and  constantly ;  but  after  competent  orthoepists  have  care- 
fully examined  it,  they  are  unable  to  agree  as  to  its  analysis." 

The  meaning  of  the  analysis  is  not  important  to  our 
present  purpose.  The  point  to  notice  is  the  failure  to  agree 
as  to  the  best  way  to 

"  distinguish  and  divide 
A  hair  'twixt  south  and  south-west  side." 

'  Intended  to  represent  twelve  different  pronunciations. 


J46  The  English  Language. 

The  letters  b,  d,  f,  /,  in,  n,  p,  r,  s,  t,  w,  x  have  continued 
to  represent  the  same  sounds  for  a  thousand  years,  with  this 
qualification,  that  originally  f  was  often  v,  a  value  that  it 
now  has  only  in  of ;  that  s  once  had  the  sound  of  z  more 
frequently  than  now  ;  and  that  s  and  t  now  combine  with  h 
and  i  to  express  peculiar  sounds.  K,  q,  and  z  have  remained 
unchanged  since  they  came  into  the  language,  except  in 
the  termination  que  from  the  French.  The  vowels  are  the 
unstable  elements. 

Many  letters  are  retained  in  positions  where  they  repre- 
sent no  sounds.  They  are  then  called  silent  letters,  and  are 
analogous  to  the  rudimentary  organs  known  to  comparative 
anatomy — surviving  traces  of  parts  that  once  performed  real 
duties.  They  could  have  become  thus  mute  and  inglorious 
only  through  decay  and  phonetic  degradation. 

A  final  b  has  become  silent  after  nt  in  bomb,  climb,  comb, 
crumb,  dumb,  lamb,  limb.  Jamb,  numb,  plumb,  thumb,  tomb, 
and  womb.  It  is  still  sounded  in  corymb,  dithyramb,  and 
rhoinb,  from  the  Greek. 

Final  e  is  silent  in  modern  English  except  in  a  few  words 
borrowed  from  the  Greek.  It  is  also  silent  when  followed 
only  by  s,  as  in  blades,  hides,  mines,  except  when  preceded 
by  a  sibilant  sound — passes,  wishes,  watches,  wages,  foxes. 
This  silent  e  arises  in  several  ways,  through  degradation  of 
some  fuller  sound,  as  a  result  of  inflexion ;  or  it  may  be 
a  part  of  the  original  word.  In  the  earlier  forms  of  the  lan- 
guage it  was  always  heard,  as  it  still  is  in  German.  But  the 
German  poets  omit  it  wherever  such  omission  suits  their 
verse,  marking  its  place  by  a  (')  as  is  often  done  in  English : 

"  Heav'n  never  took  a  pleasure  or  a  pride 
In  starving  stomachs." 

Peter  Pindar. 

But  our  early  poets  wrote  the  words  in  full,  omitting  the 
superfluous  letters  in  reading.  This  practice  can  be  dis- 
tinctly traced  as  far  back  as  the  thirteenth  century.  In  the 
following  specimen  from  that  period  the  silent  letters  are 
italicized : 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling,  147 

"  If  man  him  bithocte, 
Inderlik<?  and  ofte, 
Wu  ard^  is  te  fore 
Fro  bedde  te  fiore, 
Wu  reuful  is  te  flitte 
Fro  flore  te  pitte 
Fro  pitte  te  pine 
That  neure  sal  fine 
I  wene  non  sinne 
Suld<?  his  hert^  winnen." 

The  same  usage  is  observable  in  the  "  Prisoner's  Prayer  " 
and  Layamon's  "  Brut "  assigned  to  the  earlier  part  of  the 
same  century.  The  plural  termination  es  was  treated  sub- 
stantially in  the  same  manner  as  final  e.  Chaucer  (end  of 
the  fourteenth  century)  made  ^'wyves''  rhyme  with  "live 
is."  Mr.  Ellis,  from  an  examination  of  the  prologue  to  the 
"  Canterbury  Tales,"  found  final  e  pronounced  before  a  conso- 
nant or  at  the  end  of  a  line  658  times,  elided,  principally 
before  a  vowel  or  /i,  622  times.  Es  was  fully  pronounced 
124  times,  reduced  to  j  18  times.  That  is,  the  versification 
required  these  letters  to  be  so  treated.  By  the  time  when 
Spenser  wrote  the  final  e  was  mute,  and  only  the  ed  of  the 
past  tense  or  participle  was  heard  as  a  separate  syllable. 

G  and  k  before  n  in  the  same  syllable  are  now  silent,  as  in 
gnaw  and  know.  G  is  in  like  manner  silent  before  tn.  There 
was  once  a  ^  in  flail,  hail,  nail,  rail,  sail,  tail,  main,  rain, 
wain,  day,  say,  way,  draw,  law,  saw,  buy^  and  many  others, 
where  there  is  no  longer  a  trace  of  it  left  even  in  writing. 
It  is  silent  in  sign,  but  heard  in  signature  ;  and  similar  pairs 
may  be  made  of  benign,  benignant,  paradigm,  paradigmatic ^ 
etc. 

Seven  words — keir,  herb,  honest,  honor,  hostler,  hour,  and 
humor — that  come  to  us  through  the  French,  begin  with 
silent  h.     It  is  not  heard  after  ex,  as  in  exhaust,  exhort. 

In  ck,  one  letter  is  as  good  as  both,  and  k  may  generally 
be  regarded  as  the  intruder. 

'  It  is  preserved  in  bought. 


148  The  English  Language. 

In  an  earlier  stage  of  the  language  there  was  an  /  in  as, 
bag,  each,  S7ich,  which,  foumart,  hawser,  jasmine,  and  savage. 
It  is  written  but  not  pronounced  in  balm,  calm,  qualm,  calf, 
Jtalf,  talk,  walk,  salmon,  salve ;  still  sounded  in  film,  helm, 
realm,  xvhelm,  solder,  soldier,  and  talc.  In  the  old  word 
salver,  a  quack,  it  is  silent,  but  heard  in  salver,  a  dish.  Its 
position  is  insecure  in  haulm,  solder,  and  soldier  ;  so  that  we 
have  here  a  letter  in  all  stages  of  decay.  There  are  fading 
letters  also  in  gimblct,  handsel,  castle,  pestle,  trestle,  pumpkin, 
raspberry,  riindlet,  and  others. 

M  is  silent  only  in  mnemonics  and  allied  words  from  the 
Greek  fxvrifj.rj,  memory.  The  Greeks,  although  notably  well 
supplied  with  vowels,  admitted  combinations  of  consonants 
that  seem  to  us  unpronounceable.  In  adopting  Greek 
words  we  generally  write  a  representation  of  all  the  letters 
and  the  aspirate,  but  sometimes  have  to  leave  part  of  them 
unspoken,  of  which  an  extreme  example  is  phthisis. 

N  is  now  silent  in  damn,  hymn,  kiln,^  solemn. 

Initial/  is  silent  before  n,  s,  and  /,  from  the  Greek — pneu- 
monia, psalm,  ptyalism.  In  ptarmigan  from  the  Gaelic,  it  is 
intruded  by  mistake,  but  not  pronounced. 

The  suppression  of  r  is  seriously  threatened,  and  some  of 
us  may  live  to  see  and  not  hear  it. 

S'is  silent  in  aisle  and  island.  It  properly  belongs  in  neither. 
Letters  have  often  been  intruded  and  after  a  time  dropped. 
Aisle  is  from  the  French  aile,  from  the  Latin  ala  ;  island  \s 
from  the  Middle  English  Hand,  A.-S.  ig-land,  in  which  ig 
alone  means  an  island,  like  the  Icelandic  ey — compare 
Aldern-^j/  Angles-rj',  Guerns-rj/,  Orkn-^j,  Rams-^_;y.  The 
error  arose  from  supposing  the  word  indentical  with  isle,  a 
form  ground  down  from  the  Latin  insula. 

f/is  silent  in  many  situations  ;  between  ^  and  a  vowel — 
guard,  guess,  guide,  guy ;  in  the  digraph  ou,  sounded  as  o, 
and  the  terminations^//^  and  que,  imitated  from  the  French. 

Wis  now  silent  before  r,  as  in  wrack,  wren,  wring,  wrong, 
wrung ;  although   I   was  accustomed   in    youth  to  hear  it 


'  A.-S.  cyln  from  the  Lat.  culina. 


Pronunciation  and  spelling.  149 

pronounced  in  such  words.  It  is  also  silent  before  h  in  who^ 
whole,  whoop,  and  whore.  The  w  was  foisted  upon  the  three 
latter  words  in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  who  is  from  A.-S. 
hwd.  When  final  w  follows  a,  it  merely  determines  the 
sound  of  that  letter,  as  in  draw  and  law.  After  o  it 
either  forms  a  perfect  diphthong,  as  in  now,  or  is  very  faintly 
heard,  as  in  know. 

Intruded  letters — that  is,  not  belonging  to  the  earlier 
forms  of  words — are  the  converse  of  silent  letters.  In  the 
latter  case  a  part  of  the  old  is  dropped,  in  the  former  some- 
thing foreign  is  added.  When  they  arise  without  effort, 
while  the  organs  of  speech  are  changing  from  one  articulating 
position  to  another,  they  are  called  excrescent.  Such  are 
the  b  after  m  and  the  d  after  n.  B  is  excrescent  in  chamber, 
clamber,  cucumber,  limber,  (of  a  cannon),  number,  lumber 
(the  verb),  remember,  timber,  assemble,  bramble,  dissemble, 
crumble,  fumble,  gam-ble,  grumble,  humble,  mumble,  nimble, 
ramble,  resemble,  rumble,  stumble ;  crumb,  numb,  thumb,  limb 
(of  a  tree).  The  limb  of  the  sun  or  of  a  sextant  is  from  the 
Latin  limbus,  a  border.  Part  of  these  are  sounds  introduced 
to  round  out  words  to  goodlier  proportions,  and  after  a 
time  abandoned.  D  is  excrescent  in  tettder,  thunder,  and 
yonder.  Pis  excrescent  in  swamp,  and  /is  intruded  m  fault 
and  vault,  and  c  into  scythe,  through  misunderstanding. 

We  come  next  to  sounds  that  have  not  ceased  but  changed. 

A,  primarily  (aa),  then  passing  to  (aw)  on  the  one  hand 
and  (ae)  on  the  other ;  in  time  filling  up  the  spaces  between 
a  and  u,  and  between  a  and  e,  with  two  indeterminate  series 
of  intermediate  sounds.  The  general  tendency,  still  more 
marked  in  French  than  in  English,  is  to  narrow  the  aperture 
of  the  mouth,  and  utter  what  might  not  inaptly  be  called 
thin,  slender,  weak  sounds.  As  these  seem  especially 
adapted  to  the  female  voice,  the  tendency  is  often  called 
effeminacy.  It  comes  under  the  more  general  head  of 
economy  of  exertion, — in  short,  laziness,  the  dry-nurse  of 
language.  One  of  the  greatest  changes  has  been  the  exten- 
sive reduction  of  a  from  (aa)  to  (ai),  begun  about  the  close 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  brought  to  nearly  its  present 


1 50  The  English  Language. 

point  in  the  eighteenth  century.  So  great  a  change  could 
not  have  been  effected  suddenly.  In  passing  from  (aa)  to 
(ai),  the  pronunciation  must  have  been  successively  (a)  and 
(ae),  which  almost  entirely  supplanted  the  original  sound  in 
the  seventeenth  century.  In  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century  ale  was  pronounced  (aal),  face  (faas),  able  (aab'l), 
bake  (baak)  ;  and  we  see  what  they  have  come  to  now.  The 
several  sounds  now  represented  by  a  are  exemplified  by 
far,  fan,  fare,  fane  on  the  one  hand,  and  wharf ,  fall  on  the 
other.  Our  dictionaries  represent  wharf  as  equivalent  to 
whorf  which  to  my  ear  would  be  a  faulty  pronunciation. 
I  should  reckon  the  word  intermediate  between /z^//" and  hall. 
•  Ae  was  common  in  Anglo-Saxon  with  a  range  of  sound 
(rom  fan  to  fare.  In  the  thirteenth  century  it  went  out  of 
use,  being  replaced  by  a  and  e.  This  digraph  was  reintroduced 
in  the  seventeenth  century  to  represent  the  Latin  ae  and  the 
Greek  at.  It  is  found  in  no  native  English  word,  and  has 
always  the  value  of  the  long  e  of  the  period. 

Ai  and  ay  =  (ii),  until  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  since  which  time  the  value  (ai)  has  spread  to  all 
accented  syllables  except  ajye,  meaning  yes.  In  the  termi- 
nations of  captain,  bargain,  etc.,  it  is  obscure  and  =  (i). 
The  point  of  Shakespeare's  pun  ("  Henry  IV.,"  part  i.,  act. 
2,  sc.  4.)  depended  on  adopting  a  pronunciation  then  new. 
He  did  not,  as  some  have  supposed,  call  raisins  (reezins), 
but  reasons  (raizins).  The  Scotch  word  plaid,  which  does 
not  mean  a  kind  of  cloth,  but  a  kind  of  garment,  is  incor- 
rectly pronounced  plad  in  England  and  America. 

"  If  they  hae  twenty  thousand  blades 
And  we  twice  ten  times  ten, 
Yet  they  hae  but  their  tSLitan piaids 
And  we  are  mail-clad  men." 

Scott's  "Antiquary." 

Ao  is  never  recognized  as  a  genuine  English  combination, 
and  is  found  representing  a  single  sound  only  in  gaol,  extra- 
ordinary, and  Pharaoh,  the  sound  being  different  in  each. 
The  order  of   derivation  of  gaol  is :  Lat.  cavea,  a  coop  or 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling,  151 

cage  ;  Low  Lat.  gabia,  gabiola  ;  Old  French  gayole,  gaole  ; 
Eng.  of  the  thirteenth  century  gayole  and  gayhol.  The 
modern  Fr.  is  gedle,  from  which  the  present  pronunciation 
may  have  come.  Jail  has  been  used  as  an  alternate  form 
since  the  first  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  taking  the  place 
of  an  earlier  gail  and  gayl.  Jay,  the  name  of  a  bird,  has 
passed  through  changes  similar  to  those  of  jail.  In  extra- 
ordinary, two  vowels  that  originally  belonged  to  different 
syllables  are  now  run  together.   The  same  is  true  of  Pharaoh. 

Au  =  (ow)  up  to  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  since 
which  it  has  passed  through  various  shades  of  transforma- 
tion, ending  for  the  most  part  in  (aw).  There  are  exceptions, 
however.  In  aunt,  avaunt,  daunt,  flaunt,  gauge,  gaunt,  gaunt- 
let, haunch,  haunt,  jaundice,  jaunt,  jaunty,  laugh,  launce, 
launch,  staunch,  stauncheon,  taunt,  vaunt  the  u  is  not  heard. 
The  au  in  hautboy  and  hauteur  still  retains  the  French  value 
(oa).  Meerschaum,  a  recent  German  importation,  is  variously 
pronounced  (mairshowm,  meershawm,  meershum). 

Aw  was  little  used  in  early  times,  the  preference  being 
given  to  au.  The  value  has  always  been  the  same  as  that  of 
au,  except  that  in  modern  times  it  is  exclusively  (aw). 

C  in  the  Saxon  period  =  k,  as  now  in  call,  close,  etc.  By 
the  twelfth  century  it  began  to  =  j  before  e  and  i.  An 
Ave  Maria  of  that  period  runs  : 

"  Moder  of  milce  *  and  Maiden  Mari 
Help  us  at  ure  handing  for  thi  merci." 

The  combination  ch  was  rare  and  late.  There  is  in  the 
Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford  a  manuscript  referred  to  the 
tenth  century,  containing  a  transliteration  of  parts  of  the 
Greek  Scriptures  into  Anglo-Saxon  letters.  Ch  occurs  there 
with  the  value  (kh),  which  it  continued  occasionally  to 
represent  until  the  loss  of  that  sound.  By  the  twelfth 
century,  if  not  earlier,  it  had  become  also  (ch),  as  in  the 
ballad  of  "  King  Horn." 

The  transformation  of  (k)  to  (ch)  is  one  of  the  great 
changes  of  our  language.     Much  the  largest  part    of   the 

'  A.-S.  milts,  compassion. 


152 


The  English  Language, 


words  containing  the  latter  sound  are  from  the  French. 
The  next  greatest  part  are  native,  the  result  of  imitation. 
The  remainder  are  from  the  most  various  sources,  as  chert, 
chimpanzee,  china,  and  chocolate — words  from  the  four  quar- 
ters of  the  globe.  In  the  Saxon  words  that  have  undergone 
this  change,  the  c  was  followed  by  e,  i,  ox  y.  The  sound  (ee), 
represented  in  most  languages  by  /,  is  produced  by  raising 
the  front  part  of  the  tongue  close  to  the  palate,  leaving  but 
a  narrow  seam  for  the  emission  of  the  voice.  The  effect 
upon  a  preceding  consonant  is  like  the  injection  of  the  semi- 
vowel y.  In  one  form  or  other  this  palatalization  is  wide- 
spread in  our  language,  and  still  more  prevalent  in  some 
others,  notably  Icelandic. 

Icelandic     bjalla  pronounced  byalla     a  bell 


Scotch 


djup 

« 

dyuup     deep 

gjald 

« 

gyald      payment 

heuk 

« 

hyuuk     a  hook 

pock 

« 

pyok       a  small  bag 

card 

(( 

kyard 

garden 

<( 

gyarden 

figlio 

« 

filyo         a  son 

magno 

<( 

manyo     great 

Virginian 


Italian 


English        few,  dew,  demure,  enure,  sure. 

The  letter  e  in  Anglo-Saxon  must  have  produced  some- 
what the  same  effect,  as  may  be  aptly  shown  by  comparing 
a  few  Icelandic  and  Saxon  words. 


Icelandic 

fjon 

A.-S. 

feon 

hate 

fjandi 

u 

feond 

fiend 

kjaptr 

t< 

ceaftas 

(Scotch)  chafts 

kjosa 

« 

ceosan 

to  choose 

kjuklingr 

(( 

cicen 

chicken 

mjolk 

<< 

raeolc 

milk 

skjota 

« 

sceotan 

to  shoot 

skjalf 

<i 

scylfe 

a  shelf 

« 

ceaf 

chaff 

{( 

ceorl 

churl 

Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  153 

Thus  the  palatalization  of  c  resulted  in  ch,  a  change  not 
at  all  confined  to  English.  The  Sanskrit  cha  and  j'a  are  held 
to  have  been  thus  derived  from  ka  and  ga,  and  in  Italian  c, 
before  e  and  i,  is  pronounced  (ch).  The  change  is  the  most 
sweeping  in  French,  where  the  c  of  the  Latin  ca  becomes 
regularly  c/z,  pronounced  (sh). 

Campus  becomes  champ  bucca  becomes  bouche 

canis  "  chien  furca  "  fourche 

caput  "  chef  perca  "  perche 

castellum         "  chateau  peccare      "  pecher 

causa  "  chose  vacca         "  vache 

The  transformation,  supposed  to  have  been  accomplished 
before  the  eighth  century,  can  only  be  understood  as  effected 
gradually  and  in  the  direction  of  (k),  (kh),  (ky),  (ch),  (sh). 
The  influence  of  the  Norman  French  was  doubtless  one  of 
the  principal  causes  of  the  similar  change  in  English. 

The  same  palatalizing  tendency  transformed  ci,  si,  and  /«, 
when  followed  by  a  vowel  and  not  accented  into  (sh) — 
ancient,  pensiofi,  action.  But  this  process  was  not  com- 
pleted till  near  the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

When  c  became  ch,  sc  naturally  followed  as  sc/i,  from 
which  c  was  after  a  time  dropped,  leaving  s/i,  as  now. 

When  words  containing  ck  are  borrowed  from  French,  and 
it  is  thought  worth  while  to  keep  their  foreign  origin  in  view, 
the  c/i  is  pronounced  (sh)  as  in  chaise,  charade,  machine. 

In  a  few  Saxon  words  ce  or  ci  occurs  twice,  leaving  the 
option  to  change  either  pair,  or  both,  or  neither.  Of  cicen  we 
have  made  chicken  ;  of  cicene  we  make  kitchen;  and  from 
circe,  or  cirice,  with  the  Icelandic  kirkja,  come  the  Scot- 
tish kirk,  Chaucer's  chirche  and  the  modern  church. 

In  words  derived  from  Greek,  either  directly  or  through 
the  Latin,  ch  is  very  generally  (k),  but  there  are  such  excep- 
tions as  chart,  schism,  schist.  We  are  reminded  at  every 
step  that  human  speech  is  not  laid  down  once  for  all  by  the 
line  and  the  square.  What  words  will  yield  to  any  fashion 
or  usage  and  what  will  escape  no  one  can  foresee. 


154  The  English  Language. 

The  palatalization  of  the  c  gave  occasion  for  the  doctrine, 
more  prevalent  in  the  last  century  than  now,  that  it  cannot 
end  any  English  word.  If  in  combination  or  inflexion  It 
should  come  to  be  followed  by  e  or  i,  how  should  it  be  pro- 
nounced ?  If,  like  our  Saxon  ancestors,  we  were  to  write 
cwic  instead  of  quick,  ought  we  not  also  to  write  cwicer  and 
cwicest  ?  as  I  saw  a  short  time  ago  the  people  of  the  prov- 
ince of  Quebec  called  Quebecers  without  knowing  how  to 
pronounce  the  word.  Indeed  the  rule  in  question  is  still 
substantially  in  force.  Words  of  one  syllable,  the  most  apt 
to  add  cr  and  est,  as  black,  slack,  thick,  retain  the  k.  The 
only  monosyllables  ending  in  c  are  arc,  disc,  fisc,  lac,  marc, 
ore,  ploc,  roc,  sac,  soc,  talc,  tic,  and  zinc,  which  scarcely  admit 
of  inflexion,  and  are  not  very  often  used.  Finally,  as  a  last 
resort,  the  k  can  be  restored,  as  in  rollicking  2.Vi^  frolicking. 

E.  The  so-called  short  sounds  of  the  vowels,  a,  e,  i,  o, 
have  undergone  little  change  in  a  thousand  years,  while  the 
long  values  of  the  first  three  are  the  most  unstable  elements 
in  the  language.  There  has  been  a  shifting  of  places  among 
the  first  three  vowels.  There  was  originally  a  series  of  sounds 
represented  by  a,  e,  i,  ai,  now  represented  by  ah,  a,  e,  i. 
E  then  was  originally  like  (ai)  in  pain,  the  short  sound,  as  in 
pen,  having  been  always  the  same.  Doubling  of  the  letter 
made  no  difference  but  to  show  its  length.  By  the  middle  of 
the  sixteenth  century  the  sound  began  to  be  attenuated,  and 
the,  be,  bee,  me,  we,  he,  she  were  among  the  first  words  to  give 
way  and  be  pronounced  as  at  present.  The  prevailing  value 
is  now  (ee),  heard  in  all  cases  of  the  doubled  e,  of  the  single 
in  an  open  syllable,  or  followed  by  a  silent  e,  except  a  few 
words,  as  ere,  e'er,  there,  were,  where,  containing  the  disturb- 
ing letter  r.  To  these  may  be  added  most  syllables  contain- 
ing ea,  ei,  and  ie — a  vast  number  of  words  in  which  (ai)  has 
given  place  to  the  thinner,  sharper  sound  (ee). 

Ea  had  been  occasionally  written  by  Chaucer  without  dif- 
fering in  value  from  e ;  but  in  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  when  the  single  vowel  was  fast  yielding  to  the  new 
fashion,  ea  was  adopted  as  an  orthographical  expedient  to 
distinguish  those  words  that  still  retained  the  sound  of  (ai). 


Pronunciation  and  spelling.  155 

It  was  thus  set  up  as  a  fragile  bulwark  against  the  tide  of 
innovation,  only  to  be  swept  away  in  its  turn  in  a  wreck  of 
fragments  as  various  as  beam,  bread,  break,  dearth,  and  heart. 
But  this  took  two  hundred  years,  during  which  each  succes- 
sive chronicler  of  the  language  recorded  fresh  encroach- 
ments. The  Scotch  and  English  colonists  planted  in 
Ireland  by  James  I.  carried  with  them  their  respective 
pronunciations  of  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and 
whoever  listens  to  an  intelligent  Irishman  fresh  from  the  sod 
may  haply  hear  some  of  the  following  illustrations  of  the 
Elizabethan  era : 


preach 

Irish 

praich 

bold 

Irish 

bowld 

receive 

(< 

resaiv 

soul 

It 

sowl 

mean 

<< 

main 

roll 

(( 

rowl 

supreme 

u 

shupraim 

chair 

(( 

chiir 

The  tendency  to  thin  and  palatal  sounds  was  carried  so 
far  that  before  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  many 
words  had  acquired  the  sound  of  (ee)  from  which  custom  has 
receded.  A  chair  was  commonly  pronounced  cheer ;  a 
steak,  j/^^^/  great,  ^r^^//  and  oblige,  obleej ;  some  of  which 
may  perhaps  still  be  heard  from  old  persons. 

E  has  the  sound  of  (ae)  when  followed  by  r  in  there,  were, 
and  a  few  others  ;  but  (ee)  is  more  common  even  in  such 
situations  as  mere,  sere,  persevere. 

In  syllables  like  ber,  her,  mer,per,  ser,  when  accented,  e  has 
a  delicate  and  peculiar  sound  that  can  best  be  learned  from 
a  lady  born  to  the  use  of  the  English  tongue.  Thus  perfect 
is  neither /«r/>^/,  not paerfect,  nor  purfect ;  yet  there  are  a 
few  words  in  which  the  people  of  England  pronounce  er  as 
ar,  saying  Darby,  dark,  sarjeant.  It  is  a  seventeenth-cen- 
tury usage  which  clings  chiefly  to  a  few  local  and  aristocratic 
family  names. 

Eau  is  from  the  French,  and  with  two  exceptions  is  still 
imperfectly  assimilated  to  our  language  and  retains  the  value 
(oa).  The  exceptions  are  beaufin,  a  variety  of  apple,  pro- 
nounced biffin,  and  beauty.  The  first  word  has  been  treated 
as  French  names  of  fruits  now  are  by  our  nurserymen  and 


156  The  English  Language. 

farmers.  Beauty  has  long  been  domiciled  among  us,  from 
Old  French  and  must  have  been  called  byowty,  a  pronuncia- 
tion that  I  heard  from  old  people  in  my  childhood.  Tyn- 
dale  and  Sir  Thomas  More  wrote  bewty,  which  fixes  its 
pronunciation  for  the  first  part  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

Ei  was  in  use  as  early  as  the  thirteenth  century,  and  for 
more  than  three  hundred  years  represented  {it).  The  sound 
then  began  to  pass  into  (ae'ee),  somewhat  as  we  should  pro- 
nounce they,  in  attempting  to  give  each  vowel  distinctly. 
Next  the  second  vowel  was  slurred  over  entirely,  and  tow- 
ard the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century  deceive,  receive, 
conceit,  either,  heifer,  leisure,  purveigh,  seize  were  all  pro- 
nounced with  the  sound  (ai).  So  late  as  1704,  Dr.  John 
Jones  could  declare  (perhaps  rashly)  that  ei  never  repre- 
sented what  is  now  its  value  in  seize.  The  eighteenth  cen- 
tury made  the  digraph  what  it  is  now  prevailingly  (ee).  Still 
it  represents  the  various  shades  in  heifer,  heir,  feign,  forfeit, 
height,  deceive.  Thus  in  less  than  two  hundred  years  a  single 
pronunciation  is  split  into  six.  Herbert  Spencer's  doctrine 
of  the  differentiation  of  the  homogeneous  finds  nowhere 
apter  illustrations  than  in  language. 

To  the  question  which  is  preferable,  iither  or  eether,  it  may 
be  answered  that  there  is  no  principle  on  which  it  can  be 
decided.  The  former  was  once  the  only  pronunciation  ; 
the  latter  is  now  the  prevalent  one  ;  but  which  may  fall 
to  the  lot  of  any  word  is  as  much  a  matter  of  chance  as 
cases  of  snake-bite  or  hydrophobia.  The  party  of  (zV)  has  a 
respectable  following  in  height,  sleight,  heighho,  and  a  number 
of  late  importations  from  the  Greek,  as  kaleidopJione ,  ophi- 
cleide,  pleiocene,  and  pleistocene.  Still  the  natural  tendency 
of  the  language  is  towards  (ee).  We  might  indeed  com- 
promise, as  Dr.  Johnson,  when  asked  whether  he  would 
say  eether  or  iither,  is  related  to  have  answered,  "  Naither, 
Sir." 

Eg  is  a  combination  of  vowels  inherited  from  the  Anglo- 
Saxon,  in  which  they  were  pronounced  separately,  with  a 
little  more  stress  on  the  one  than  the  other.  When  the 
accent  was  on  the  first  the  tendency  was  to  become  merely 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  157 

e ;  if  on  the  second,  to  become  yo.  Eo  occurs  in  George, 
leopard,  people,  and  in  the  rare  or  obsolete  words  feod,  feoff, 
jeopardy,  and  yeoman,  with  five  different  values.  It  is  also 
found  in  the  termination  eon  in  bludgeon,  pigeon,  surgeon,  etc., 
where  it  degenerates  into  the  common  obscure  {li).  The  e, 
however,  may  be  considered  as  serving  no  other  purpose 
than  to  give  the  value  of  j  to  g.  People  comes  to  us  from 
the  Latin  populus,  through  the  Old  French  pueple.  The 
English  spellings  are  imitations.  Poeple  occurs  in  the  "  Vision 
of  Piers  Plowman,"  and  Chaucer  wrote  peple,  peeple,  and  poe- 
ple. Whichever  vowel  was  placed  first,  the  two  were  equiva- 
lent to  e  alone,  which  was  the  general  value  of  eo  in  Middle 
English.  Yeoman  is  a  word  of  obscure  origin,  variously 
written,  but  most  frequently  yeman. 

"  A  lytle  boy  among  them  asked. 
What  meaned  that  gallow-tre  ? 
They  sayde  to  hange  a  good  yem^n, 
Called  Wyllyam  of  Cloudesle."  ' 

Jeopardy  is  from  the  Old  French  jeu  parti,  a  game  of 
chance  in  which  the  chances  were  equal,  which  was  therefore 
risky  on  both  sides — spelling  and  pronunciation  various  like 
the  last.  Feoff  is  likewise  Old  French,  with  similar  uncer- 
tainty of  spelling,  but  always  spoken  fef.  Feod  is  perhaps 
remotely  from  the  Icelandic /"/^Ma/,  a  heritable  estate.  The 
dictionaries  give  the  absurd  pronunciation  feud,  which  suits 
the  Low  Latin  and  French  forms  of  the  word.  Leopard  is 
of  course  Latin.  A  consistent  pronunciation  of  these  two 
words  would  have  \)Q.&n  f^-od  and  l^-o-pard,  but  would  be  too 
much  labor. 

Eu  and  Ew.  In  most  instances  we  find  one  original  sound 
dividing  into  several,  but  here  are  two  sounds  coalescing 
into  one.  In  the  fourteenth  century  there  were  two  classes 
of  words,  respectively  of  Saxon  and  French  origin,  but 
written  alike,  indifferently  with  eu,  ue,  ew,  ewe,  the  sound 
of  the  former  class  being  that  heard  in  certain  rural  pro- 
nunciations  in    New    England,  as   keow,  teown,  neow ;   the 

*  "  Adam  Bell,  Clim  of  the  Clough  and  William  of  Cloudeslee." 


'158  The  English  Language. 

latter  (ue).  During  the  sixteenth  century  the  distinction 
became  forgotten  and  unheeded  ;  and  now,  with  two  or 
three  exceptions,  we  call  them  all  (yu).  But  as  we  can  no 
longer  utter  that  sound  after  r,  we  say  ruu  and  thruu.  Shew 
is  now  pronounced  (shoa),  and  in  this  country  is  generally 
and  consistently  written  show.  Shrew  is  now  pronounced 
(shruu),  although  the  readers  of  Shakespeare  will  recall  the 
lines : 

"  Hor. — Now  go  thy  ways  ;  thou  hast  tam'd  a  curst  shrew. 
Luc. — 'T  is  a  wonder,  by  your  leave,  she  will  be  tam'd  so." 

"  Taming  of  the  Shrew." 

Sewer  was,  until  lately,  often  written  and  pronounced 
shore.  Compare  Shore-ditch,  London.  Strew  is  regular  in 
pronunciation.  It  is  recent ;  the  older  forms,  straw  and 
strow,  running  back  side  by  side  to  Saxon  times. 

Sew  stands  alone  in  the  perfect  antagonism  between  the 
written  and  the  spoken  word. 

Ewe  may  be  construed  as  ew  with  the  addition  of  a  final 
silent  e,  which  applies  equally  to  all  such  words  as  tie,  toe, 
rue,  dye,  etc. 

Ey.  What  has  been  said  of  ei  applies  equally  to  ey  ;  as  / 
and  y  were  used  interchangeably  from  the  middle  of  the 
thirteenth  to  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Ey  has 
passed  through  the  same  transitions  as  ei,  eye  being  a  solitary 
relic  of  the  oldest  usage,  sley,  convey,  obey,  abeyance  of  the 
seventeenth-century  pronunciation,  and  key  (Irish  kay^  the 
later  attenuation.  As  a  termination  ey  is  equivalent  to  y 
and  fluctuates  between  (ai)  and  (ee),  as  in  alley,  valley,  pulley. 

F  has  always  had  the  same  pronunciation  in  English, 
except  in  the  modern  of  =  (ov). 

G,  initial  before  everything  but  e,  i,  and  y  was  always  g,  as 
at  present ;  before  these  vowels  it  was  (y)  until  the  sound 
passed  gradually  into  the  modern  (j).  Often  in  the  middle, 
and  always  at  the  end  of  words,  except  after  n,  it  was  (gh) 
not  easily  distinguished  from  (kh).  In  modern  usage  the 
primary  sound  (g)  has  gained  on  the  others,  and  we  have 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  159 

get,  gild,  give  instead  of  jet,  jild,  jive.  This  is  not  actual 
etymology,  but  only  an  indication  of  the  change  in  the  value 
of  the  letters.  G  combines  with  a  preceding  n  and  with  a 
following  h  (which  see  below).  Judgement  is  now  almost  uni- 
versally written  judgm^w/.  Abridgment  and  lodgment  are 
also  common,  a  violation  of  general  usage  poorly  compen- 
sated by  the  economy  of  a  single  letter.  But  the  practice  is 
not  new.     Sir  J.  Finett  wrote  in  1656: 

*'  At  the  furthest  end  of  the  town  eastward,  the  ambassador's 
house  was  appointed,  but  not  yet  lodgable." 

King  James's  Bible,  Ed.  161 3  and  Shakespeare,  Ed.  1623, 
have  the  full  form  judgement. 

Many  words  which  in  Saxon  began  with  ^  are  now  written 
with  y,  as  yard,  yell,  year,  young,  the  sound  having  never 
changed. 

H  represents  a  jerked  emission  of  voiceless  breath,  the 
organs  of  speech  being  generally,  but  not  necessarily,  in 
the  position  for  uttering  the  succeeding  sound.  This  has 
always  been  its  character  at  the  beginning  of  a  syllable. 
Uncombined  it  ends  no  English  word  except  a  few  exclama- 
tions. It  combines  with  c,  g,  p,  s,  and  t  to  represent  a 
variety  of  sounds,  all  of  which  except  the  first  are  simple, 
and  should  be  expressed  by  single  letters.  H  is  pronounced 
with  some  difficulty  before  or  after  a  consonant,  although 
the  Saxons  seem  to  have  found  it  easy  enough  before  /,  n, 
and  r ;  and  the  escape  of  a  little  breath  after  consonants 
produced  the  Sanskrit  and  Greek  aspirates.  The  present 
Irish  occasionally  aspirate  perfectly.  I  remember  to  have 
listened  with  wonder  when  a  child  to  a  travelling  Hibernian 
(modern  tramp)  who  thus  set  forth  his  own  erudition : 

"  I  was  once  in  the  cap'haacity  of  a  t'haicher,  an'  I  cud  t'haich 
aanything  that  iver  was  t'haicht  be  man — Haibra,  Aljaibra, 
Matthamaatics,   or  aanything  at  haal." 

What  is  called  Cockneyism  originates  in  the  slight  diffi- 
culty of    uttering  two  successive  vowels,  or  an   h  after  a 


i6o  The  English  Language. 

consonant.     One   who   should    try  to  say  "  a   ass  and  an 
horse,''  would  be  very  liable  to  say  "  a  hass  and  an  'orse" 

In  the  middle  and  end  of  syllables,  in  Saxon,  h  was  (kh). 
As  ^was  (gh),  the  two  became  confused.  In  the  "  Ormu- 
lum,"  referred  to  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century, 
the  two  are  used,  generally  with  the  above  distinction.  After 
that  time  the  ^  began  to  take  the  place  of  both.  A  further 
advance  was  made  by  writing  the  two  letters  together. 

''^  Knyghies  in  her  conisantes,  clad  for  the  nones." 

"  Piers  Plowman." 

Layamon  in  1205  had  written  cnihten,  and  Robert  of 
Gloucester  in  1300,  knigtes.  Gk  then  always  represented 
(gh)  or  (kh),  a  sound  that  waxed  ever  fainter  until  by  the 
close  of  the  sixteenth  century  it  had  vanished  entirely  from 
the  speech  of  the  most  polished  society  in  the  South  of 
England.  It  lingered  long  in  the  North,  and  in  Scotland 
and  Ireland,  where  it  was  still  common  within  the  memory 
of  living  men,  and  perhaps  may  yet  be  heard  in  secluded 
valleys.  Since  English  organs  are  now  too  dainty  for  the 
sound,  the  spelling  gh  has  become  the  special  opprobrium 
of  our  orthography,  and  gives  rise  to  a  number  of  futile 
substitutes.  If  a  German  teacher  were  to  require  a  class  of 
American  youths  to  say  «zV^/,  some  would  pronounce  it  nikt, 
a  part  would  answer  nisht,  while  the  greater  number  would 
content  themselves  with  nit.  So  of  ninety-four  words  and 
their  derivatives  containing  gh,  the  digraph  =  /  in  hic- 
cough  ;  k  in  hough  and  lough ;  g  in  aghast,  burgher,  ghastly, 
ghost,  gherkin,  ghoul,  nylghau  ;  =  fin  chough,  dough,  cough, 
draught,  enough,  laugh,  rough,  slough,  sough,  tough,  and 
trough  ;  and  is  silent  in  seventy-three.  This  digraph,  when 
not  beginning  a  syllable,  follows  only  i  or  u.^  The  /  may  be 
preceded  by  a  or  e ;  the  u  must  follow  a  or  o.  The  loss  of 
the  sound  is  to  be  regretted.  The  Germans,  Spaniards,  and 
Russians  do  not  find  it  difficult  or  inelegant.  I,  who  heard 
it  every  day  for  twenty  years,  can  testify  to  the  emphatic 

'  Burgher  is  an  exception. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  i6i 

strength  it  imparts.  How  feeble  and  foisonless  must  be  the 
speech  that  does  not  distinguish  the  might  of  nations  or  of 
the  Deity  from  the  mite  of  old  cheese  ! 

I.  The  primary  sounds  represented  by  i  are  heard  in 
pippin  and  pierce.  The  former,  called  the  short  sound,  has 
held  its  place  from  the  earliest  times  ;  the  latter  is  now  never 
represented  by  i  in  English,  except  in  a  few  words  of  foreign 
origin,  as  magazine.  Yet  that  was  the  long  sound  until  the 
sixteenth  century.  It  is  held  by  the  most  competent  author- 
ity that  Chaucer  and  Gower,  and  all  before  them  pronounced 
even  the  pronoun  /  as  (ee).  The  change  took  place  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  doubtless  spread  gradually  from 
word  to  word.  Shakespeare  (edition  of  1623)  treated  /,  aye, 
and  eye  as  identical  in  Juliet's  frantic  outburst  on  the  reported 
suicide  of  Romeo : 

"  Hath  Romeo  slaine  himselfe  ?  say  thou  but  /, 
And  that  bare  vowell  /  shall  poyson  more 
Than  the  death  darting  eye  of  cockatrice, 
I  am  not  I,  if  there  be  such  an  /." 

The  long  sound  at  present  expressed  by  i  is  clearly  a 
diphthong,  but  its  elements  are  not  so  clear.  Two  sounds 
may  be  distinguished — in  fire  and  in  fine.  The  first  =  cCi, 
that  is  (aa'ee)  run  together  very  rapidly ;  the  second  is 
more  doubtful,  but  to  my  ear  is  nearest  the  rapid  utterance 
of  (u'ee). 

There  are  a  series  of  intermediate  sounds  represented  by 
jf,  ranging  from  (i)  to  (u),  firth,  girl,  squirrel,  birth,  firsts  bird. 

An  unaccented  i  between  a  consonant  and  a  following 
vowel  has  a  palatalizing  effect,  becoming  equal  to  initial  y, 
or  even  transforming  the  consonant.  Examples  are  labial, 
radiant,  ruffian,  region,  retaliate,  abstemious,  opinion,  incipient, 
interior,  envioiis.  The  d  in  soldier  is  converted  intoy,  and  the 
sound  of  j^  is  produced  in  specious,  revulsion,  potion,  anxious, 
etc. — the  order  of  transformation  being  (see'us),  (s'yus), 
(shus). 

le.  The  Saxons  pronounced  this  digraph  nearly  as  we  do 
in  the  words  mischief  and  mischievous.     In  the  fourteenth 


l62 


The  English  Language. 


and  fifteenth  centuries  it  was  used  for  the  sound  (ai),  of 
which  we  have  relics  in  the  Irish  thaif  for  thief,  and  belaive 
for  believe.  Again  I  may  repeat  that  the  essential  point  is 
not  that  the  people  of  those  ages  pronounced  these  letters 
differently  from  us  ;  but  that  they  pronounced  certain  words 
differently,  no  matter  how  they  might  be  written,  which  was 
a  quite  secondary  consideration.  The  following  examples 
will  illustrate  the  pronunciation  and  writing  of  the  fifteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries : 


FIFTEENTH 

Written  Pronounced 


SEVENTEENTH 

Written  Pronounced 


beleve 

belaiv 

believe 

beleev 

bare 

bair 

bier 

beer 

brefe 

braif 

brief 

breef 

chefe 

chaif 

chief 

cheef 

fende 

faind 

fiend 

feend 

frende 

fraind,  frend 

friend 

freend 

lege 

laij 

liege 

leej 

pece 

pais 

piece 

pees 

priest 

praist 

priest 

preest 

sege 

saij 

siege 

seej 

thefe 

thaif 

thief 

theef 

The  change  to  (ee)  took  place  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries,  which  is  still  the  prevailing  value  of  /<?, 
but  proved  not  to  be  permanent  for  the  two  words  friend 
and  sieve.  Friend  and  fie^id,  correlative  in  their  origin, 
kept  together  from  Saxon  times  till  the  seventeenth  century 
as  freend  and  feend,  fraind  and  faind,  freend  and  feend; 
and  at  last  parted  company. 

le  was  generally  used  in  the  middle  ages  as  a  termination, 
where  we  now  write  y,  or  ey. 

leu  is  French  and  equal  to  (yuu) 

lew  is  a  more  anglicized  form  of  the  preceding,  found 
only  in  view  and  its  compounds. 

J  has  always  the  same  sound,  with  the  single  exception 
that  it  is  (y)  in  the  Hebrew  phrase  Hallelujah. 

It  is  not  found  in  any  word  of  known  Saxon  origin.  It 
came  into  the  language  from  the  French  when  Saxons  and 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling,  163 

Normans  began  to  unite  into  one  people.  It  probably  had 
from  the  first  the  same  sound  as  now,  although  it  has 
ceased  to  have  that  value  in  French.  Although  not  fojind 
in  the  extant  remains  of  Anglo-Saxon, /(^ir,  to  be  discordant, 
jaw,  jerk,  jingle^  jolt,  and  jowl,  occur  early  in  English,  and 
are  not  traceable  to  any  other  source. 

L  must  have  been  always  essentially  the  same.  In  utter- 
ing the  sound  the  tip  of  the  tongue  touches  the  front  part 
of  the  palate,  while  the  voice  passes  on  each  side,  slightly 
vibrating  the  edges.  The  sound  is  thus  like  a  vowel  in 
being  continuous  through  an  aperture  of  a  certain  conforma- 
tion, and  like  a  consonant  in  that  the  voice  is  obstructed. 
In  Sanskrit  /,  like  r,  was  treated  as  either  a  vowel  or  a 
consonant,  but  possibly  with  a  distinction  between  the  vowel 
and  consonant  values.  Owing  to  this  vocal  character,  /  and 
r,  with  final  silent  e,  may  follow  an  instantaneous  consonant, 
as  in  simple  and  centre.  The  final  e  in  such  words  serves  no 
purpose,  and  would  be  no  better  if  placed  before  the  /  or  r, 
as  the  pronunciation  is  really  simpl  and  sentr. 

In  uttering  one  articulate  sound  the  anticipation  of  others 
immediately  following  often  modifies  the  first.  This  phe- 
nomenon has  played  a  large  and  important  part  in  determin- 
ing the  forms  of  words,  and  will  be  adverted  to  again  in 
treating  of  the  numbers  of  nouns.  If  then  an  /  follows  an  a, 
there  is  generally  a  tendency  to  modify  the  a  into  (aw),  as 
ball,  call,  fall,  salt,  balsam.  This  is  carried  to  such  an  ex- 
tent as  completely  to  suppress  the  /  in  chalk,  talk,  walk. 
On  the  other  hand,  when  followed  by  i  and  another  vowel, 
the  /  is  palatalized  by  anticipation,  as  in  salient,  valiant^ 
million,  postilion.  In  French  and  the  Spanish  of  Mexico 
the  palatalization,  which  is  somewhat  differently  indicated, 
leaves  no  perceptible  trace  of  the  /,  and  travailler  and  tor- 
tillas are  heard  as  tra-va-yai  and  tor-tee-yas. 

N.  Besides  its  plain  sound  in  noon,  n  is  subject  to  two 
modifications :  the  one  when  it  is  followed  by  (g)  or  (k),  the 
other  when  followed  by  i  or  e  and  another  vowel.  We  have 
examples  of  the  former  in  ink,  cincture,  cinque,  minx,  ringy 
zx\A  Jinger.     If  the  (g)  or  (k)  be  in  the  same  syllable  with  the 


164  The  English  Language. 

K,  the  latter  is  always  modified.  When  they  are  in  different 
syllables,  the  result  is  less  uniform.  If  the  syllable  begin- 
ning with  (g)  or  (k)  has  the  accent,  the  n  remains  unaltered ; 
if  the  syllable  ending  in  n  be  accented,  the  n  is  generally 
modified ;  but  there  are  a  number  of  exceptions,  among 
which  are  ancony,  penguin,  concrete.  The  n  remains  unaf- 
fected in  the  prefixes  en,  in,  un,  and  generally  in  con  and 
syn.  It  may  be  questioned  whether  the  n  itself  is  ever  (ng) 
or  if  the  sound  always  requires  both  letters.  If  all  the  words 
were  like  sing  and  singer,  there  would  be  a  showing  for  the 
latter  alternative ;  but  in  a  word  like  languid — pronounced 
lang-gwid — the  «  alone  in  the  first  syllable  expresses  the  full 
sound. 

N  in  accented  syllables,  followed  by  i  or  e  and  another 
vowel,  is  palatalized,  as  in  Albanian,  opinion.  The  alphabet 
of  the  Sanskrit  has  four  «'s,  two  of  which  are  the  palatalized 
•n  and  the  n  before  k,  thus  recognizing  them  as  distinct 
sounds.  In  Spanish  the  palatalized  /  and  n  are  counted  as 
distinct  letters  ;  the  former  written  //,  and  the  latter  n.  The 
mark,  called  tilde  over  the  n  is  said  by  the  Spanish  Academy 
to  have  been  originally  a  second  n. 

O  is  used  at  present  to  represent  at  least  five  vowel  sounds, 
easily  distinguished  in  cold,  hot,  wonder,  wolf,  who.  Exces- 
sive refinement  enlarges  the  number  considerably.  Mr.  A. 
J.  Ellis  makes  fifteen  heard  in  English  alone.  The  first  and 
second  of  the  above  five  are  the  most  liable  to  division,  the 
first  into  three,  heard  in  710,  know,  which  is  supposed  to  fade 
away  into  (uu),  and  thirdly  a  sound  allied  to  (aw) — fawm  for 
form.  One  of  the  distinctions  between  speech  at  present 
in  England  and  the  United  States  is  the  growing  tendency 
in  the  former  country  to  assimilate  long  o  to  (aw),  especially 
before  r,  and  say  glawry,  impawrtant,  memawrial.  So 
humorists  represent  gentlemen  of  the  Dundreary  type  as 
saying  dorg  or  dawg  for  dog,  and  prefacing  their  oracular 
utterances  with  Atv  !  where  an  American  would  use  O !  if 
anything. 

It  is  possible  that  this  English  sound  may  be  the  original, 
and  that  the  present  fashion,  like  many  other  fashions,  is  a 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  165 

reversion  to  an  earlier  form.  In  that  case  the  long  and  short 
^'s  would  have  been  once  an  exact  pair,  differing  only  in 
duration.  To  this  point  I  shall  advert  again.  Such  a  sup- 
position is  strengthened,  among  other  evidence,  by  the  spell- 
ing of  the  word  land.  Henry  III.  writes  it  loand ;  before 
his  time  it  was  written,  as  now,  land,  but  afterwards  for 
more  than  a  century  it  was  usually  written  lond.  All  would 
be  reconciled  by  supposing  it  pronounced  for  several  ages 
lawnd.  So,  many  words  were  written  sometimes  with  an  a 
and  sometimes  with  o. 

Many  words  once  pronounced  with  the  full  long  sound  of 
o  have  fallen  away,  generally  towards  u ;  such  are  do,  who., 
shoe,  two, 

"  And  lay  an  apple  upon  hys  head, 
And  go  syxe  score  paces  hym/r^?, 
And  I  my  selfe  with  a  brode  arow 
Shall  cleave  that  apple  in  two."  ' 

One,  which  is  now  pronounced  wun,  was  generally  written 
oon,  but  pronounced  (oan),  a  sound  still  retained  in  alone, 
atone,  and  only  (when  not  called  unly). 

"  None  save  only  a  little  foot-page 
Crept  forth  at  a  window  of  stone : 
And  he  had  two  armes  when  he  came  in, 
And  he  went  back  with  o/te."  ' 

Oa.  As  o  is  intermediate  between  a  and  u,  and  liable  to 
oscillate  between  these  two  extremes.  When  it  was  thought 
necessary  to  distinguish  the  long  sound  of  o,  it  was  some- 
times written  00,  which  I  observe  first  in  Sir  John  Mande- 
ville,  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century.  In  two  hundred 
years  that  had  declined  sensibly  towards  ti,  when  a  further 
distinction  was  adopted.  Words  that  were  tending  towards 
u  were  written  with  00,  and  oa  was  chosen  to  represent  and 
preserve  the  long  sound  of  0,  a  distinction  that  has  been  well 

'  "  Adam  Bell,  Clem  of  the  Clough  and  William  of  Cloudeslee." 
*  "  Old  Robin  of  Portingale,"  Percy's  "  Reliques,"  page  209. 


1 66  The  English  Language. 

maintained.  Oa  is  uniform  except  in  broad,  which  is  perhaps 
the  persistence  of  the  older  sound  of  o.  Its  occurrence  in  the 
proclamation  of  Henry  III.  is  temporary  and  exceptional. 

Oe.  As  already  remarked,  I  have  preferred  to  treat  the  e 
in  doe,  foe,  roe,  sloe,  toe  as  a  silent  final  e,  indicating  the  length 
of  the  preceding  vowel.   Shoe  was  formerly  pronounced  shoa  : 

"  For  though  a  widewe  hadde  but  oo  schoo, 
So  pleasaunt  was  his  In  principio. 
Yet  wolde  he  haue  a  ferthing  or  he  wente." 

Chaucer. 

A  few  words  derived  from  the  Latin  are  at  the  present 
time  generally  written  with  oe,  as  foetid,  foetus. 

Oeu.  Manoeuvre  is  a  word  adopted  from  the  French  in 
the  present  century. 

Oi  is  the  most  perfect  of  diphthongs,  both  vowels  retain- 
ing their  earliest  sounds.  It  came  into  our  language  from 
the  French,  and  Mr.  Ellis  is  of  opinion  that  it  must  have 
been  at  first  nearly  (uu'ee).  By  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  however,  it  had  acquired  its  present  sound.  In  the 
seventeenth  century,  when  slender  sounds  were  in  fashion, 
oi  took  the  sound  of  («)  in  many  words  ;  and  we  still  occa- 
sionally hear  laboring  people  say  biil,piizin,piint,jiint,  which 
we  complacently  regard  as  vulgarisms.  They  are  merely 
old-fashioned. 

The  diphthong  oi  is  a  prolonged,  distinct  sound  which 
cannot  be  fully  preserved  except  under  the  protection  of  the 
accent.  Otherwise  it  is  liable  to  fall  away  into  some  indis- 
tinct sound,  as  in  av^/rdupois,  conn^j^sseur,  tort£??se,  porp<??se. 
Patois,  soiree,  and  some  others  are  still  treated  as  foreign 
words. 

Oo,  as  already  observed,  was  first  introduced  to  mark  the 
long  sound  of  o,  as  in  go.  When  o  in  many  words  was  fast 
declining  towards  u,  oa  was  introduced  to  secure  the  old 
sound,  and  oo  was  left  to  indicate  the  downward  tendency. 
It  now  represents  only  sounds  that  are  also  indicated  by  u; 
and  good,  rude  ;  foot,  put ;  blood,  bud  are  perfect  pairs. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling,  167 

Ou  is  a  form  first  employed  about  the  close  of  the  thir- 
teenth century,  when  it  =  (uu),  as  in  French.  The  design 
seems  to  have  been  to  fix  and  define  that  sound  when  u 
itself  showed  a  tendency  to  become  (ue).  It  was  next  em- 
ployed to  express  the  sound  of  0  in  soul,  in  which  some 
think  they  hear  both  vowels — a  distinct  <?,  followed  by  a 
very  faint  (u).  That  value  of  ou  which  is  now  the  most  com- 
mon— in  loud,  doubt,  out, — came  into  use  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  when  a  large  number  of  words  changed  their  vowel 
sounds  from  (uu)  to  (ow). 

Ow  represents  three  sounds,  in  cow,  flow,  and  knowledge. 
The  first  may  be  considered  its  normal  power ;  the  third  is  a 
single  exception.  In  the  earlier  ages  of  English,  ow  =  ou, 
and  represented  the  same  sounds.  Palsgrave,  writing  in 
1530,  compared  the  French  ou  to  the  vowel  sound  in  "  a  cowe, 
a  mowe,  a  sowe  " — that  is,  a  cow,  a  hay-mow,  a  sow — which 
would  make  these  kuu,  muu,  suu,  as  in  Lowland  Scotch. 
The  transition,  word  by  word,  from  (uu)  to  (ow)  went  on 
through  the  whole  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  in  the 
seventeenth  the  last  of  (uu)  disappeared.  At  the  same  time 
there  were  a  large  class  of  words,  chiefly  from  A.-S.  dw  and 
dw,  that  have  always  had  the  sound  (oa),  and  the  boy  who 

" bent  a  bow  to  shoot  a  crow  " 


might  belong  to  any  age. 

Oy  =  ot. 

P,  in  our  language,  when  not  combined  with  /i,  appears  to 
have  been  always  and  everywhere  the  same, 

Ph  =  /  except  in  Stephen,  and  generally  in  nephew  in 
England.  It  is  used  chiefly  in  words  derived  from  the  Greek, 
where  it  is  now  believed  to  have  had  thd  value  of  ph  in 
uphold.  The  Romans  who  were  accustomed  to  hear  Greek 
as  a  living  tongue  did  not  render  (p  by  their  f,  but  always 
by  ph.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Greeks  had  no  other  means 
for  expressing  the  f  in  Roman  names.  Ph  is  also  employed 
in  the  same  manner  in  transliterating  Semitic  words,  as 
ephod,  seraph,  naphtha,  sapphire.     P  is  silent  before  ph. 


1 68  The  English  Language. 

Q  is  inseparably  followed  by  //,  and  =  ku,  or  rather  kw. 
Let  the  tongue  be  pressed  against  the  palate  so  as  to  pre- 
vent the  utterance  of  sound  ;  the  release  of  that  contact  and 
consequent  issue  of  the  voice  is  initial  k.  W,  or  (uu)  is 
formed  by  protruding  the  lips  and  narrowing  their  aperture. 
These  positions  of  the  tongue  and  lips  may  be  assumed  at 
the  same  time ;  the  result  when  the  voice  is  released  is  hi  ; 
if  there  be  instant  transition  to  another  vowel,  it  will  be  kw, 
followed  by  that  other  vowel.  Qu  in  European  alphabets 
is  always  derived  from  the  Latin ;  hence  the  Greek  and 
Russian  have  nothing  equivalent.  Our  Saxon  ancestors 
employed  in  its  place  cw,  which  dispensed  with  an  unneces- 
sary letter.  Even  in  Saxon  times  gu  began  to  creep  in,  and 
now  there  is  not  a  cw  in  our  language. 

R  has  overtaxed  the  discriminating  powers  of  orthoepists, 
who  are  far  from  agreed  as  to  its  varieties,  or  the  manner  of 
their  production.  Ben  Jonson,  1640,  says :  "  R  is  the  Dog's 
letter,  and  hurreth  in  the  sound  the  tongue  striki?ig  the  inner 
palate,  with  a  trembling  about  the  teeth.  It  is  sounded 
firmer  in  the  beginning  of  words,  and  more  liquid  in  the 
middle  and  ends,  as  in  rarer,  viper."  Exception  may  be 
taken  to  the  words  which  I  have  italicized  ;  but  the  fact 
remains  that  two  and  a  half  centuries  ago,  as  now,  initial  r 
was  pronounced  more  distinctly  than  the  medial  or  final. 
The  point  of  the  tongue  is  brought  near  to  the  anterior  part 
of  the  palate,  without  touching,  and  vibrates  slightly  under 
the  passing  vocal  breath.  With  most  persons  there  is  no 
vibration,  and  consequently  no  r  at  all.  Mr.  Ellis  says  :  "  In 
English  at  the  present  day  r  has  at  least  two  sounds,  the 
first,  when  preceding  a  vowel,  is  a  scarcely  perceptible  trill 
with  the  tip  of  the  tongue,  which  in  Scotland,  and  with 
some  English  speakers,  as  always  in  Italy,  becomes  a  clear 
and  strong  trill.  *  *  *  The  second  English  r  is  always 
final  or  precedes  a  consonant.  It  is  a  vocal  murmur  differ- 
ing very  slightly  from  (u).  *  *  *  After  (a,  aw,  u)  the 
effect  is  rather  to  lengthen  the  preceding  vowel  than  to  pro- 
duce a  distinct  diphthong.  Thus  farther,  lord,  scarcely 
differ  from  father,  laud,    *    *    *   That  a  distinction  is  made, 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  1 69 

by  more  perhaps  than  are  aware  of  it,  is  certain,  but  it  is 
also  certain  that  in  the  mouths  of  by  far  the  greater  number 
of  speakers  in  the  South  of  England,  the  absorption  of  the  r 
is  as  complete  as  the  absorption  of  the  /  in  talk,  walk,  psalm, 
where  it  has  also  left  its  mark  on  the  preceding  vowel." 

This  may  be  taken  to  be  the  present  state  of  the  case  in 
England  ;  and  many  in  this  country  are  entirely  incapable 
of  uttering  the  sound  of  r  except  after  a  pause  or  a  con- 
sonant. As  it  is,  or  was,  the  most  sonorous  of  the  consonants, 
its  disappearance,  like  that  of  (kh),  is  a  further  weakening 
of  the  language  much  to  be  deplored.  Of  course,  like  all 
phonetic  degradation,  it  is  economy,  or  parsimony,  of  exer- 
tion. But  parsimony  in  speech  does  not  differ  in  principle 
from  parsimony  in  food,  clothing,  or  in  any  application  of 
labor  or  material.  The  first  object  is  to  do  the  work  re- 
quired, and  do  it  well,  and  next  to  retrench  needless  ex- 
penditure. But  retrenchment  may  be  carried  so  far  as  to 
render  the  product  worthless.  So  language  may  be  trimmed 
down  until  it  becomes  weak  and  feckless,  unfit  for  the  work 
of  strong,  manly  speech. 

As  r  is  so  nearly  allied  to  the  vowels,  it  has  generally  the 
effect  of  prolonging  or  modifying  a  preceding  vowel,  which 
will  be  perceived  by  comparing 

fan  with  far 

fane  "     fare 

pen    "     per 

feet   "     fear 

fine    "     fire  house    "     hour 

It  will  be  observed  that  after  a  long  vowel  or  diphthong, 
a  short  faint  sound  of  u  is  interpolated. 

R  is  apt  to  change  places  with  an  adjacent  vowel,  being 
sometimes  before  and  sometimes  after  it.  In  older  speci- 
mens of  the  language  we  find 

am     for  ran  girdle  for  griddle 

brid     "  bird  kers      "    cress 

brunt  *'  burnt  fersh     "    fresh 

gers     "  grass 


fin 

with  fir 

bolt 

(( 

borne 

lost 

(( 

born 

bulk 

u 

burn 

1 7o  The  English  Language, 

In  consequence  of  its  vowel  character,  r  final  after  certain 
consonants,  however  written,  is  pronounced  without  an 
intervening  vowel,  or  with  a  scarcely  perceptible  vocal 
glide.     Compare : 

sombre  somber  sombr 

sundry  sunder  sundr 

offer  offr 

eagre  eager  eagr 

whisper  whispr 

centre  center  centr 

The  same  is  true,  even  to  a  greater  extent,  of  /,  as  in 
stubble,  sickle,  idle,  eagle,  shuffle,  maple,  whistle,  brittle,  driz- 
zle. Among  the  spelling  reforms  undertaken  by  Dr.  Web- 
ster was  the  substitution  of  the  ending  er  for  re  after  b  and 
/.  This  particular  reform  was  not  one  of  his  happiest 
inspirations,  as  in  either  case  the  e  is  not  pronounced ;  as 
the  same  rule  is  not  applied  to  /,  and  both  immediate  and 
remote  etymology  is  disregarded  in  center,  meter,  and 
theater,  the  three  words  specially  cited  in  illustration.  The 
English,  French,  Latin,  Greek,  and  the  English  derived 
adjectives  of  these  words  are : 


centre 

centre 

centrum 

kentron 

central 

metre 

metre 

metrum 

metron 

metrical 

theatre 

theatre 

theatrum 

theatron 

theatrical 

the  r  in  each  case  following  the  t.  The  change  is  not 
generally  adopted  in  England,  nor  universally  in  this 
country. 

The  Greeks  always,  and  the  Norsemen  and  our  Saxon 
ancestors  often,  indicated  an  aspiration  or  sound  of  Ji  before 
r  at  the  beginning  of  a  word.  It  has  been  customary  in 
transliterating  Greek  to  write /2  after  the  aspirated  r,  and  for 
the  other  two  languages  either  to  do  the  same  or  omit  the 
h  altogether. 

I  find  no  difficulty  in  pronouncing  //  before  r,  but  great 
difficulty  in  pronouncing  it  after;  and  I  venture  the  opinion 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  171 

that  the  three  peoples  named  understood  themselves  and 
wrote  as  they  spoke,  and  that  the  Greeks,  for  example, 
did  not  say  Rhode  and  Arrhias^  but  Hrode  and  Arhrias. 

S,  alone  or  combined  with  h,  represents  the  four  sounds 
heard  in  sister,  rose,  fashion,  and  pleasure.  The  first 
two  have  been  the  same  from  the  earliest  times;  the 
other  two  came  into  use  in  the  seventeenth  century. 
(Sh)  had  previously  been  represented  by  sch,  as  it  still 
is  in  German.  That  century  was  filled  with  disorders 
and  civil  wars,  political  and  religious.  It  saw  the  acces- 
sion and  expulsion  of  the  House  of  Stuart,  of  which 
one  king  perished  on  the  scaffold  and  another  was 
driven  with  his  sons  forever  from  the  inheritance  of  his 
fathers.  It  saw  London  twice  desolated  by  plague  and 
once  by  fire,  a  parliament  turned  out-of-doors  by  armed 
force,  a  commonwealth  established  and  overthrown.  It 
witnessed  the  rebellions  of  Montrose  and  Monmouth,  the 
landing  of  a  second  William  the  Conqueror,  and  the  fruit- 
less attempt  of  James  to  array  the  Irish  against  England 
and  Scotland.  So  many  great  events  had  never  before 
been  crowded  into  a  single  century ;  and  the  constant 
popular  ferment  had  its  effect  upon  the  language  of  the 
people.  The  changes  were  so  great  that  in  many  instances 
usage  has  receded  from  the  extreme  water-marks  of  that 
period.  Among  these  were  the  sound  of  (sh),  once  heard 
in  consume,  pursue,  sew,  suit,  supreme,  but  now  met  with 
only  occasionally  in  Scotland  and  Ireland.  There  is  an 
illustrative  anecdote  of  a  Scotch  shopkeeper,  who,  worn 
out  of  patience,  replied  to  a  higgling  customer :  "  Weel, 
weel,  just  shoot  [suit]  yersel,  an'  Al  shoot  mysel." 

To  tell  concisely  the  sound  that  s  represents  in  each 
instance  is  very  difficult.  We  are  reminded  again  that 
usage  is  unconscious  of  any  rule  or  principle,  and  that  the 
systematizer  can  at  best  give  but  a  semblance  of  regularity 
to  the  chaos  of  flying  atoms.  However,  s  initial  is  always 
(s) ;  also  when  immediately  before  or  after  a  weak  consonant 
— f,  h,  k,  p,  t,  th  in  thin — whiffs,  goshawk,  skips,  speaks,  starts^ 
faiths ;  in  the  prefix  mis  and  the  terminations  ss  and  us — 


172 


The  English  Language. 


mislay,  darkness,  circus,  genius,  famous.  It  is  generally  so  in 
the  prefix  a'zj-/  but  usage  is  not  quite  uniform.  I  have  been 
accustomed  to  except  only  disaster,  discern,  disease,  dismal, 
dissolve.  Even  in  these  few  the  dis  is  not  always  from  the 
same  original.  To  these  may  be  added,  ist,  final  as,  except 
as,  whereas,  has,  was,  and  a  few  foreign  plurals;  2d,  yes ; 
3d,  final  is,  except  is  and  his.  Final  s  in  all  other  connec- 
tions is  generally  (z)  ;  in  a  few  words  from  the  French  it 
is  silent.  A  following  e  sometimes  preserves  the  sound 
of  (s),  which  would  otherwise  be  (z),  as  in  asperse,  expense. 
The  final  e  does  not  generally  save  the  (s)  after  a  vowel — 
lose,  dispose,  please,  fuse,  amuse  {all  verbs),  but  has  that  effect 
in  dase,  dose,  geese,  lease,  loose.  We  have  thus  a  distinction, 
often  but  not  always  observed,  that  nouns  or  adjectives 
present  a  weak  consonant  where  corresponding  verbs  have 
the  strong. 


WEAK 

STRONG 

WEAK 

STRONG 

advice 

advise 

house 

house 

bath 

bathe 

life 

live 

belief 

believe 

loss 

lose 

brass 

braze 

mouse 

mouse 

calf 

calve 

price 

prize 

close 

close 

rise 

rise 

device 

devise 

thief 

thieve 

grass 

graze 

use 

use 

S  =  (sh)  when  preceded  by  a  consonant  and  followed  by 
ion,  the  i  palatalizing  the  combination,  as  in  diversion,  expul- 
sion, mission,  passion  ;  also  when  thus  followed  by  a  palatal- 
ized u — sugar,  censure,  tonsure,  sensual,  fissure,  pressure, 
impressure,  sure,  sumach;  and  in  the  words  nauseate,  nause- 
ous, osseous,  where  the  e  following  s  has  the  palatalizing 
effect.  When  the  termination  sion,  sure,  etc.,  is  preceded 
by  an  accented  vowel,  the  s  is  (zh)  instead  of  (sh) — cohesion, 
contusion,  explosion,  disclosure,  exposure,  measure,  pleasure, 
treasure.  It  has  also  the  same  value  in  combinations  that 
are  similar  though  not  identical — as  crosier,  osier,  hosier, 
brasier,  ambrosia,  elysian,  scission,  abscission. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  1 73 

T  when  not  modified  by  the  following  letter  must  have 
been  always  (t).  But  when  a  palatal  vowel  (ii)  or,  what  is 
the  same  thing,  the  semivowel  y  or  (yu)  follows,  there  is  a 
tendency  to  palatalize  the  /,  like  c  and  s  in  the  same  situa- 
tion, to  (sh).  It  never  becomes  (zh).  This  palatalization 
must  have  taken  place  as  early  as  the  fourteenth  century, 
since  Chaucer  wrote  indifferently  discrecioun,  discressioun, 
and  discretioiin.  In  regard  to  the  termination  tiire,  usage  and 
opinion  both  differ,  varying  all  the  way  from  (naichuur)  to 
(naitr).  The  first  extreme  is  heard  only  from  pedants  on 
exhibition,  the  second  from  rustics.  The  admissible  means 
are  (naichur)  and  (naityur)  of  which  I  should  prefer  the 
latter  ;  but  would  say  (temperatyuur)  and  (sepultyuur). 

From  a  want  of  suitable  single  characters,  th  is  now  in  use 
for  (th)  and  (dh)  in  thin  and  thine.  This  spelling  superseded 
the  Saxon  thorn  and  crossed  d  in  the  fourteenth  century. 

U  and  V  are  originally  the  same  letter.  From  the  Greek 
transcription  of  Roman  names,  it  seems  to  have  had  in 
Latin  the  three  values  (uu,  v,  w).  The  first  of  these  seems 
to  have  been  the  uniform  Saxon  sound,  varied  only  by  its 
greater  or  less  duration.  The  Conquest,  and  prolonged 
intercourse  with  France  introduced  a  great  number  of 
French  words  in  which  u  Avas  (ue).  Out  of  these  grew  our 
present  (yu),  the  vowel  heard  in  use,  unity,  mule,  pure. 
There  are  only  three  words  in  the  language  having  this 
value  of  u  that  do  not  come  to  us  through  the  French  or 
the  Latin.  Of  these  /me  and  puke  are  native  English,  and 
emu,  of  unknown  origin,  was  introduced  into  Europe  by  the 
Portuguese. 

It  was  when  the  long  u  had  come  generally  to  signify  (ue) 
that  the  digraph  ou  was  introduced  to  distinguish  and  pre- 
serve (uu).  The  change  from  (ue)  to  (yu)  may  be  referred 
to  the  seventeenth  century. 

U  has  now  the  six  values,  (yu)  in  mule,  (uu)  in  rule,  {u)  in 
put,  (u)  in  but,  (i)  in  busy,  and  (w)  in  anguish,  (u)  and  (i) 
may  be  termed  the  vanishing  points  to  which  all  indistinct 
vocal  sounds  tend,  for  which  compare  the  last  syllables  of 
ocean,  further,   kingdom,  simpleton,   captious,    and    the   first 


1 74  The  English  Language. 

syllables  oi  perform,  hirsute,  congratulation.  Even  when  not 
recognized  as  a  separate  vowel  sound,  it  probably  exists  as  a 
kind  of  residual  product  in  many  languages,  and  in  my 
opinion  is  more  frequent  in  French  than  in  English,  {u)  has 
probably  existed  time  out  of  mind  along  side  of  (uu),  they 
being  respectively  the  short  and  the  long  of  the  vowel, 
(ue)  has  gone  entirely  out  of  use  in  English,  Persons  in 
this  country  who  try  to  learn  German  are  apt  to  mistake  it 
for  (u)  or  (i).  A  trace  of  short  (ue)  remains  in  bury  and 
busy,  written  in  A,-S.  with  y,  in  early,  middle,  and  modern 
English  with  u,  but  probably  always  with  nearly  the  same 
sound,  (u)  was  not  recognized  by  orthoepists  as  an  English 
sound  until  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century,  when  it 
extended  to  many  places  now  occupied  by  {u). 

V,  as  a  consonant,  seems  to  have  been  from  a  very  early 
period  always  the  same.  There  was  originally  only  one  form 
for  u  and  v ;  and  when  two  simultaneous  forms  came  into 
use  in  the  twelfth  or  thirteenth  century,  it  was  not  to  dis- 
tinguish the  vowel  from  the  consonant.  With  some  irregu- 
larity V  was  written  at  the  beginning  of  a  word,  and  u 
everywhere  else.  This  usage  continued  into  the  seventeenth 
century,  and  was  followed  in  King  James's  Bible.  Sam 
Weller  is  a  type  of  a  class  who  find  it  difficult  to  pronounce 
an  initial  v.  When  I  was  young,  there  was  in  the  neighbor- 
hood a  man  of  that  class  from  the  old  country  whom  the 
boys  used  to  banter  to  say  rapidly,  "  Veal,  wine,  vinegar, 
very  good  victuals,  I  vow."  When  thoroughly  roused,  the 
old  man  would  run  off  in  a  string :  "  Yes,  I  can  say  *  weal, 
wine,  winegar,  wery  good  wit  ties,  I  wow,'  as  fas'  as  any 
of  ye." 

It  can  be  little  better  than  a  superstition  that  prevents  any 
word  from  ending  with  the  letter  v.  The  avoidance  of  cer- 
tain endings  is  curious.  No  word  in  English  ends  with  /, 
except  the  names  of  a  few  foreign  animals ;  none  in  J,  q,  or 
V.  Few  native  words  end  in  o,  still  fewer  in  u,  and  none 
in  a. 

As  u  is  the  last  of  the  independent  vowels,  w  being  never 
used  alone,  and  y  only  as  the  equivalent  of  i,  this  may  be  a 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


175 


proper  place  to  remark  on  the  distinction  of  long  and  short 
vowels.  In  languages  having  simple  scales  of  sounds  the 
distinction  might  be  merely  one  of  duration,  the  sounds 
remaining  the  same,  like  musical  notes  differing  only  in 
time ;  but  in  English  the  long  and  the  short  of  any  vowel 
are  entirely  different  sounds.  This  will  be  seen  by  placing 
them  in  pairs,  the  long  below  the  short. 


hat 

met 

bit 

not 

us 

hate 

mete 

bite 

note 

use 

Of  most  of  our  vowel  sounds  exact  pairs  cannot  be  made, 
unless  by  taking  accented  and  unaccented  syllables,  as  in 
notorious,  in  which  we  may  call  the  first  o  short  and  the 
second  long.  The  following  are  nearer  making  pairs, 
although  as  generally  heard  they  are  only  approximations : 


LONG 

SHORT 

LONG 

SHORT 

far 

fat 

feel 

fill 

mare 

met 

file 

fi(duciary) 

pane 

pa(temal) 

foal 

fo(ment) 

fall 

folly 

rule 

full 
but 

W.  If  the  lips  be  protruded  and  brought  near  together, 
the  vocal  sound  that  can  be  produced  is  (uu),  usually  repre- 
sented by  00.  If  the  lips  be  brought  a  little  closer  still,  and 
if,  on  the  instant  that  the  voice  issues,  the  organs  of  speech 
move  to  another  position,  the  initial  and  instantaneous 
sound  heard  is  w  as  a  consonant.  It  has  no  perceptible 
duration,  but  is  a  mere  starting-point,  like/  m part.  In  our 
language  it  must  be  followed  by  a  vowel.  It  is  certainly 
possible,  but  not  easy,  to  pronounce  r  after  it,  on  ac- 
count of  the  vocal  character  of  that  letter.  L  is  still  more 
difficult. 

Wh  has  been  the  subject  of  much  dispute.  In  my  judg- 
ment it  is  (hw).  Bearing  in  mind  that  h  is  not  a  vocal  sound 
but  a  mere  breathing,  try  this  experiment.  Pronounce  sep- 
arately, with  intervals  between,  h  00  en ;  then  diminish  the 


1 76  The  English  Language. 

intervals  until  they  disappear,  and  you  will  have  a  fair 
approximation  to  when.  Next  try  the  order,  00  h  en. 
Thirdly,  place  the  lips  in  the  position  of  w,  and  say  wheji 
slowly  and  carefully.  You  will  find  that  there  is  first  the 
voiceless  breathing,  which  ceases  the  instant  the  vocal  w,  or 
(uu),  is  reached ;  that  passes  instantly  into  e,  followed  by  n. 
To  speak  of  wJi  as  a  simple  but  peculiar  consonant  partaking 
of  the  properties  of  w  and  h  seems  to  me  little  better  than  to 
call  it  a  univocal  compound  of  sound  and  silence. 

As  a  vowel  w  =  (uu),  and  as  such  it  occurs  alone  in 
Welsh,  but  never  in  English,  where  it  is  always  preceded  by 
a,  e,  or  o.  After  a  it  merely  indicates  one  sound  of  that 
vowel.  After  e,  omitting  the  exceptions  cited  under  that 
letter,  it  is  (uu).  I  thus  construe  ewe.  The  last  letter  is 
final  silent  e ;  the  first  gives  the  palatal  sound  expressed  by 
y,  leaving  w  =  (uu). 

Latin  and  the  languages  derived  from  it  are  without  the 
letter  w,  but  have  the  sound,  which  most  of  them  express, 
as  in  English,  by  ti,  as  in  the  Latin  anguis,  Italian  guado, 
Spanish  igiial,  English  languish,  assuage. 

There  is  a  pronunciation  remarked  on  in  England  as  pecul- 
iarly American,  which  culminates  in,  but  is  not  confined  to, 
the  word  whole.  It  consists  in  making  the  o  "long"  in 
sound  but  short  in  time,  and  dwelling  upon  the  /  as  if  it  were 
doubled,  thus  differing  from  hole  in  making  the  o  shorter  and 
doubling  the  /.  The  word  then  insensibly  becomes  hull.  It 
ought  to  differ  from  hole  only  in  having  the  0  longer.  A 
still  worse  pronunciation  is  appearing  among  some  of  those 
v/ho  insist  on  speaking  as  they  spell,  in  trying  to  make  the  w 
audible.  This  produces  a  most  uncouth  and  barbarous 
vocable  for  sake  of  a  written  letter  that  is  no  part  of  the 
original  word.  In  all  the  equivalents  except  the  English  the 
w  is  wanting.  It  appears  to  have  crept  in  from  some  local 
dialect  about  the  year  1500,  and  attached  itself  to  a  number 
of  words  in  the  manner  of  the  cockney  h.  In  some  words, 
as  whole,  whore,  and  whoop,  it  has  been  retained  in  the  writ- 
ten but  not  in  the  spoken  language.  One  and  once  present 
the  w  to  the  ear  but  not  to  the  eye  ;  and  from  hoot  and  hot. 


Prontmciation  and  Spelling.  177 

hoary  and  lioly,  it  has  disappeared  altogether.  As  to  wholly, 
which  Walker  very  justly  thought  should  be  written  wholely 
to  correspond  with  solely,  I  have  always  been  accustomed 
so  to  pronounce  it. 

X  is  a  compound  equivalent  to  ks  or  gs.  It  begins  no 
English  word,  and  is  followed  only  by  c,  ch,  h,  p,  q,  s,  t,  or  a 
vowel.  It  is  (ks)  when  final,  when  accented,  or  when  fol- 
lowed by  any  of  the  consonants  named  except  h.  As  x  = 
ksy  the  element  s  becomes  (sh)  in  situations  where  a  single  s 
would  undergo  the  same  change — anxious,  fluxion. 

Y  originated,  as  we  have^  seen,  among  the  Greeks,  with 
whom  it  probably  had  nearly  the  value  of  (ue),  which  is 
peculiarly  liable  to  pass  into  {ii,  i).  When  the  Romans  be- 
gan to  study  Greek  as  a  polite  language,  they  distinguished 
this  letter  from  all  their  own  vowels  by  introducing  it  as  a 
new  character  ;  and  the  French  and  Spaniards  still  call  it  the 
Greek  i.  As  a  vowel  its  various  shades  of  sound  have  ranged 
between  the  extremes  i  and  u.  The  sound  (ue)  is  one  that 
the  English  early  sought  to  avoid.  It  seems  to  have  disap- 
peared in  the  thirteenth  century,  to  have  returned  again  with 
the  influx  of  French  words  in  the  fourteenth,  written  u  or 
eu,  only  to  disappear  and  become  unpronounceable  in  the 
seventeenth.  In  Scotland,  at  least  near  the  Border,  floor 
may  perhaps  still  be  called  (fluer),  but  farther  north  will  be 
found  various  substitutes  as  (fluur,  flyuur,  fleer).  But  when 
the  sound  first  died  out  it  parted  company  forever  with  the 
letter  J,  which  then  became  indistinguishable  from  i. 

"  I  schal  ryse,  and  I  schal  go  to  my  fadir,  and  I  schal  seie  to 
him,  Fadir,  I  have  synned  agens  heuene,  and  bifore  thee  ;  Now 
I  am  not  worthi  to  be  clepid  thi  sone,  make  me  as  oon  of  thi 
hyrid  men." — Luke  xv.,  18,  by  Wycliffe. 

Gradually  custom  assigned  y  to  certain  places  and  i  to 
others,  so  that  they  are  never  interchangeable. 

F  is  a  vowel  equal  to  i  except  when  initial,  in  which  latter 
case  it  has  always  the  force  of  a  consonant,  and  is  to  (ee)  as 
w  to  (uu). 


1 78  The  English  Language. 

PRINCIPLES   OF   SPELLING. 

1.  Every  word  of  considerable  length  can  easily  be  divided 
into  a  number  of  parts,  as  cir-cum-loc-u-to-ry.  Each  of  these 
parts  is  called  a  syllable,  from  a  Greek  original  signifying 
taken  together,  and  consists  of  a  single  vowel  sound,  together 
with  such  letters  as  are  pronounced  along  with  it,  without 
the  aid  of  any  other  vowel  sound.  It  may  be  a  single  vowel 
alone,  or  a  vowel  sound  represented  by  several  written  char- 
acters, preceded  or  followed  by  consonants,  or  even  by  vowel 
characters  not  sounded.  A,  an,  no,  now,  stone,  view,  thieves, 
are  examples. 

2.  An  open  syllable  is  one  ending  with  a  vowel,  one  that 
ends  with  a  consonant  is  called  a  closed  syllable.  Under  the 
head  of  word-making  I  have  shown  reasons  for  believing 
that  all  syllables  were  originally  open,  and  that  a  closed  syl- 
lable is  the  remnant  of  a  dissyllable  that  has  lost  the  last  vowel. 

3.  Our  language,  like  many  others,  has  a  decided  prefer- 
ence— still  only  a  preference — for  open  syllables.  Any  Eng- 
lish-speaking person  seeing  for  the  first  time  the  words 
carat,  pater,  would  naturally  divide  them  ca-rat,  pa-ter, 
and  not  as  they  should  be,  car-at,  pat-er. 

4.  The  tendency  is  to  give  a  prolonged,  slender  sound  to 
the  vowel  of  an  open  syllable.  To  this  there  are  many 
exceptions  and  limitations.  A  final  a  is  always  short,  hence 
the  article  a  is  never  what  is  called  long.  /  and  a  end  no 
native  English  word,  unless  they  can  be  said  to  do  so  when 
standing  alone. 

5.  The  vowel  of  a  closed  syllable  is  preferably  short.  It 
is  uniformly  so  only  when  a  single  vowel  is  followed  by  a 
single  consonant.  The  vowels  of  closed  syllables  are  pro- 
longed in  a  great  variety  of  ways,  many  of  which  are  mere 
contrivances  for  showing  that  the  vowel  sound  is  long.  Of 
these  the  first  in  rank  is  the  silent  final  e,  which  makes  the 
difference  of  bat  and  bate,  bit  and  bite.  Then  combinations 
of  vowels,  whether  pronounced  in  whole  or  only  in  part,  are 
generally,  but  not  universally,  long.  There  are  also  a  few 
instances  where  i  and  o  followed  by  two,  or  even  three,  con- 
sonants are  long — bind,  blind,  behind,  find,  grind,  hind,  kind. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  1 79 

mind,  wind,  pint,  bolt,  colt,  dolt,  jolt,  molt,  bold,  cold,  fold,  gold, 
hold,  mold,  old,  sold,  told,  wold,  fort,  port.  Finally  i  followed 
by  gk  silent  is  long — sigh,  fight,  lights.  The  lengthening  of 
the  i  is  a  compensation  for  the  loss  of  gh. 

6.  The  termination  ed  of  verbs  is  written  in  full,  however 
pronounced,  as  in  landed,  stamped,  hushed,  snuffed,  sighed. 
There  are,  as  usual,  a  few  exceptions.  We  write  heard,  not 
heared,  and  laid,  paid,  said,  and  sometimes  staid  instead  of 
layed,  payed,  sayed,  and  stayed.  Made,  shortened  from 
maked,  is  disguised  almost  beyond  recognition.  When  a 
verb  already  ends  with  an  e,  one  e  is  omitted — live,  lived, 
smile,  smiled.  One  e  is  also  omitted  with  the  termination  er, 
and  generally  before  ing.  It  is  retained  in  dyeing,  singeing, 
swingeing,  tingeing,  to  distinguish  them  from  dying,  singing, 
swinging,  tinging,  and  in  hoeing  corn,  shoeing  horses,  and 
toeing  a  mark.  In  general,  a  silent  final  e  is  dropped  be- 
fore all  suffixes  beginning  with  a  vowel : 

Fine,  fined,  finer,  finery,  finest,  fining,  finish,  finable ;  bride, 
bridal ;  guide,  guidance ;  plume,  plumage;  grieve,  grievance ; 
move.,  movable  j  force,  forcible  j  ice,  icy  ;  true,  truism. 

7.  A  silent  final  e  is  generally  retained  before  a  suffix 
beginning  with  a  consonant,  or  when  necessary  to  preserve 
the  sound  of  the  original  word — peaceful,  peaceable,  change- 
able, courageous,  mortgageor.  It  is  sometimes  omitted  when 
it  immediately  follows  the  main  vowel — due,  duly,  duty,  and, 
contrary  to  the  soundest  analogy  in  such  words  2,^  judgment 
and  lodgment.  Truly,  like  truth  and  trust,  is  consistent, 
being  older  than  the  present  spelling  of  true.  Wisdom  is 
not  from  the  modern  word  wise.     It  is  Saxon  unchanged. 

8.  Any  monosyllable  or  accented  final  syllable,  having  a 
single  vowel  and  closed  by  a  single  consonant,  doubles  that 
consonant  before  a  suffix  beginning  with  a  vowel : 

Fit,  fitted,  fitter,  fittest,  fitting. 

Red,  redden,  redder,  reddest,  reddish. 

Rid,  riddance,  ridder. 

Pig>  pigged,  pigging,  piggery,  piggish. 

Confer,  conferred,  conferree,  conferrer,  conferrant,  conferring. 


i8o 


The  English  Language. 


If  the  consonant  were  not  doubled,  the  preference  for 
open  syllables  would  cause  the  first  line  of  this  example  to 
be  read  :  fit,  fi-ted,  fi-ter,  fi-test,  fi-ting. 

9.  When  the  last  syllable  is  not  accented  usage  ceases  to 
be  uniform. 

a.  The  termination  ly  in  civilly,  morally,  etc.,  is  not  a 
doubling  of  the  last  letter,  but  the  same  ly  as  in  comely. 

b.  Final  c  adds  a  k,  and  g  a  second  g,  to  preserve  the  hard 
sound  before  suffixes  beginning  with  e,  i,  ox y. 

c.  As  an  accent  on  the  last  syllable  causes  a  doubling,  so 
if  a  word  consists  of  two  nearly  equal  syllables,  the  final 
consonant  is  doubled — hob-nobbing,  kid-napping.  This  is  the 
only  reason  that  can  be  assigned  for  doubling  the/  in  wor- 
shipper, as  is  most  frequently  done.  If  such  words  as  hard- 
ship, fiag-ship,  war-ship,  could  admit  of  these  terminations, 
the  last  letter  would  probably  be  doubled.  It  remains 
single  in  filliped,  galloped,  and  walloped.  We  can  only  sug- 
gest that  lip  and  lop  are  elements  of  less  volume  than  ship. 

d.  The  following  list  contains  most  of  the  words  of  two 
syllables  that  are  written  sometimes  with  and  sometimes 
without  doubling  the  last  letter  before  the  suffixes  ed,  er, 
est,  ing,  ish,  ist  : 


anvil 

cudgel 

hatchel 

pencil 

snivel 

apparel 

dial 

hovel 

peril 

stencil 

barrel 

dishevel 

jewel 

pistol 

swivel 

bevel 

dowel 

kennel 

pommel 

tassel 

bias 

drivel 

kernel 

postil 

teasel 

bowel 

duel 

label 

pupil 

tinsel 

brothel 

enamel 

laurel 

quarrel 

tonsil 

bushel 

equal 

level 

ravel 

towel 

cancel 

flannel 

libel 

revel 

trammel 

carol 

focus 

marshal 

rival 

travel 

cavil 

fuel 

marvel 

rowel 

trowel 

channel 

funnel 

medal 

sandal 

tunnel 

chapel 

gambol 

metal 

shovel 

vial 

chisel 

gravel 

model 

shrivel 

victual 

counsel 

grovel 

panel 

sibyl 

crenel- 

handsel 

parcel 

signal 

Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  i8i 

Dishevel  and  enamel,  although  trisyllables,  having  the 
accent  on  the  second  syllable,  follow  the  analogy  of  dissyl- 
lables. Of  the  whole  number  y6  end  in  /  and  2  in  s, 
letters  very  apt  to  be  doubled  at  the  end  of  words.  More- 
over a  single  s  is  liable  to  be  pronounced  as  z.  Other  suf- 
fixes, not  originally  English,  often  follow  the  analogy  of 
the  original  words  from  which  these  are  derived,  but  not 
with  entire  regularity.  Perry  in  England  and  Webster  in 
America  are  the  principal  advocates  of  the  single  letter.  In 
this  country  probably  the  majority  follow  them  in  most 
instances,  while  the  opposite  practice  prevails  in  England  ; 
but  no  one  seems  to  be  entirely  uniform  and  consistent. 

10.  Trisyllables  of  similar  endings,  accented  on  the  first 
syllable,  and  having  a  consequent  secondary  accent  on  the 
last,  should,  according  to  the  widest  analogy,  double  the 
last  letter,  but  only  a  few  of  them,  as  handicap,  manumit, 
ricochet,  having  the  second  accent  well  marked,  do  so  in- 
variably. Reason  and  analogy  are  allowed  to  count  for 
little.  A  few  are  variously  spelled  by  different  writers,  of 
which  carburet,  sulphuret,  pedicel,  sentinel,  and  hospital,  need 
no  special  remark.  Parallel  scarcely  ever  doubles  the  final 
letter — for  no  other  visible  reason  than  to  avoid  four  ?'s. 
Bishop  Hall  has  even  unparalle table.  Most  authors  write 
co7npromitted  and  benefited.  As  mere  English  words  there 
is  no  reason  for  the  difference.  One  may  possibly  be  found 
in  their  derivation  from  the  Fr.  compromettre  and  bienfait. 

11.  A  word  ending  with  a  doubled  consonant,  other  than 
/,  retains  both  letters  before  sufifixes, — ebb-ing,  add-ed,  oddly, 
stiff-ness,  embarrass-ment.  Usage  is  not  uniform  in  regard 
to  a  doubled  /  before  a  consonant : 


dull-ness 

dul-ness 

enthrall-ment 

enthral-ment 

enroll-ment 

enrol-ment 

thrall-dom 

thral-dom 

full-ness 

ful-ness 

skill-ful 

skil-ful 

fulfill-ment 

fulfil-ment 

will-ful 

wil-ful 

install-ment 

instal-ment 

The  shorter  form  prevails  in  England  ;  the  longer  among 
those  Americans   who    accept    Webster    as  an  authority, 


1 82  The  English  Language. 

holding  that  two  /'s  are  necessary  to  preserve  the  sound 
after  a  and  o.  Full  and  fill  are  especially  liable  to  be  cur- 
tailed. In  general  full  retains  both  /'s  in  compound  words 
as  full-blown,  full-sailed,  but  is  liable  to  drop  one  before 
consonantal  suffixes.  Some  write  fulfill  and  others  fulfil. 
but  no  one  v^ntQs  fullfill. 

12.  Words  ending  in  a  doubled  consonant  generally  retain 
it  when  they  are  lengthened  by  prefixes. 

boss  emboss  sell  undersell 

buff  rebuff  tell  foretell 

fall  befall  thrall  enthrall 

roll  enroll  staff  tipstaff 

It  is  the  practice  in  England,  and  to  some  extent  in 
America,  to  omit  the  last  /  in  such  cases,  especially  in  distil 
and  instil.  Many  words  compounded  with  all,  well,  and 
mass  omit  the  last  of  the  two  consonants :  almighty,  almost, 
alone,  already,  also,  although,  altogether,  always,  ivithal,  where- 
withal, welcome,  welfare.  Candlemas,  Christmas,  Lammas, 
Michaelmas.  All  compounds  of  which  full  is  the  last  part 
drop  the  last  /,  artful,  hopeful,  etc.  We  also  write  until,  not 
untill.  Mas  is  really  a  shortening,  but  the  reason  of  the 
others  is  that  the  old  spellings  were  al,  ful,  til,  and  wel,  and 
the  compound  words  were  formed  before  the  adoption  of  the 
modern  spellings  of  all,  full,  till,  and  well. 

13.  Some  combinations  of  letters  are  avoided.  A,  i,j,  k, 
u,  V,  X,  and  y  are  never  doubled,  and  w  and  h  only  in  glow- 
worm, slow-worfn,  with-hold,  and  a  few  imperfect  combina- 
tions not  yet  fairly  consolidated  into  words — rough-hew, 
high-heeled,  etc.  Q  never  occurs  without  being  followed  by 
u.  /never  precedes  the  closely  allied  letters y and  jj/.  Some 
combinations  are  preserved  that  cannot  be  pronounced  in 
full  2iS  phthisic,  giaour,  caoutchouc,  but  then  we  skip  the  hard 
parts. 

14.  Up  to  the  fifteenth  century  i  and  y  were  used  indis- 
criminately, and  there  are  a  few  remains  of  their  tenancy  in 
common,  in  which  we  sometimes  meet  with  the  one  and 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  183 

sometimes  the  other — hythe  or  hithe,  tryst  or  trist,  gyves  or 
gives,  mystery  or  mistery^  syllabub  or  sillabub,  cypher  or  cipher 
— all  old  words  except  the  last,  and  seldom  met  with.  Y 
retains  sole  possession  in  scythe  and  byre.  At  present  this 
letter  has  its  position  defined  with  more  than  usual  regu- 
larity. 

a.  As  a  consonant  it  is  the  first  letter  of  a  word,  or  of  a 
part  elsewhere  independent — be-yond,  hal-yard,  steel-yard. 

b.  As  a  vowel  it  is  final,  with  or  without  a  preceding  e,  and 
takes  the  place  of  a  number  of  terminations, — Latin  ius,  ia, 
ium,  as,  as  in  amatory,  controversy,  estuary,  civility  ;  Fr.  and 
Eng.  e,  ee,  i,  ie,  in  ditty,  dainty,  majesty,  cony  ;  A.-S.  ic  and 
ig  in  homely,  happy.  As  a  final  too  it  is  a  diminutive  express- 
ing affection,  chicky,  birdy,  kitty,  pussy,  Bobby,  returning  to 
ie  in  Annie,  Jennie,  Nellie. 

c.  Y  forms  a  digraph  or  a  diphthong  after  a,  e,  o,  and  rarely 
ti,  in  any  part  of  a  word — defraying,  abeyance,  employ, 
buying. 

d.  It  is  v,ery  common  as  a  vowel  in  words  derived  from  the 
Greek — symbol,  amethyst,  baryta. 

e.  The  following  words,  although  not  of  Greek  origin,  are 
written  with  y  from  having  passed  through,  or  from  being 
supposed  to  be  in  some  way  connected  with,  that  language — 
beryl,  gypsey,  gypsum,  hyssop,  lachrym.al,  lymph,  papyrus,  syca- 
tnine,  sylvan. 

f.  The  spelling  of  dye  and  lye  serve  to  distinguish  them 
from  die  and  lie.  The  y  in  rye  has  remained  since  Saxon 
times. 

g.  The  y  in  nylgau  and  typhoon  is  due  to  the  whim  of 
those  who  transliterated  these  Eastern  words  into  European 
characters. 

h.  Words  of  more  than  one  syllable,  ending  in  y  without 
another  vowel  before  it,  change  it  to  i  before  suffixes  begin- 
ning with  a,  e,  or  a  consonant,  but  retain  it  before  i  to  avoid 
the  doubling  of  that  letter — holy,  holier,  holiest ;  carry,  car- 

*  Meaning  an  art,  trade,  dramatic  performance,  from  Lat.  ministerium,  and 
erroneously  supposed  to  be  the  same  as  the  Greek  mystery,  an  esoteric  or  secret 
doctrine. 


184  The  English  Language. 

riage,  carries,  carried,  carrier,  carrying ;  bury,  burial.  In  the 
few  words  of  one  syllable  usage  is  much  at  sea.  Verbs  fol- 
low the  analogy  of  dissyllables — try,  tries,  tried,  trial,  trying. 
Nouns  from  these  verbs,  denoting  the  doer,  admit  of  both 
forms — crier  and  cryer,  drier  and  dryer,  flier  and  flyer,  pliers 
and  plyers — with  a  preference  in  this  country  for  i.  Other 
nouns  are  regular.  The  adjectives  shy,  sly,  spry,  and  wry 
retain  the^  throughout.  On  the  other  hand,  monosyllables 
in  ie  necessarily  change  the  i  into  y  before  /,  die,  dies,  died, 
dying. 

15.  There  are  now  about  1,000  adjectives  in  the  language 
ending  in  -able  or  -ible,  and  a  very  few  in  -eble,  -oble  and  -uble. 
The  primary  meaning  in  this  class  is  capability  of  undergo- 
ing some  action.  Movable,  fordable,  fusible  signify  suscepti- 
ble of  being  moved,  forded,  or  fused.  They  are  either  from 
Latin  verbal  adjectives  in  -abilis,  -ebilis,  -ibilis,  -obilis,  -ubilis, 
or  imitations  of  such.  To  the  question  which  vowel  to  use 
the  following  is  an  answer  in  part. 

a.  The  termination  when  applied  to  words  not  derived 
directly  or  indirectly  from  Latin  is  -able — answer-able,  bear- 
able, drink-able,  eat-able,  foreknow-able,  unquench-able.  As  this 
implies  a  knowledge  of  Latin  it  is  rather  a  reason  than  a  rule 
of  practice. 

b.  Words,  from  whatever  source,  that  have  been  long  and 
commonly  used  in  the  language  take  -able — agree-able,  bail- 
able, comfort-able,  service-able,  unconquer-able.  This  leaves 
room  for  doubt  and  irregularity,  as  it  is  a  question  of  degree 
how  long  and  how  much  a  word  has  been  in  use.  Some  are 
written  in  two  ways,  as  add-able  and  add-ible,  convers-able 
and  convers-ible,  refer-able  and  referr-ible,  the  first  forms 
following  a  direct  English,  and  the  latter  an  indirect  Latin, 
analogy.  In  a  few  instances  there  are  two  different  words 
from  the  same  source — def end-able  and  defens-ible. 

c.  When  a  Latin  original  is  kept  in  view,  the  verbal  ad- 
jectives in  -abilis  and  -ibilis,  if  there  be  any,  are  followed. 
Latin  verbs  are  divided  into  four  classes  according  to  the 
last  letter  of  the  essential  part  of  the  word.  If  that  be  a, 
the  derived  adjective  ends  in  -abilis ;   if  anything  else,  in 


Pronunciation  and  spelling.  185 

-ibilis.  If  there  be  no  such  Latin  adjective,  then  the  Eng- 
lish one  follows  the  characteristic  of  the  verb.  About  two 
thirds  of  the  entire  class  end  in  -able. 

16.  There  are  a  number  of  words  ending  in  -nee  and  -nt, 
preceded  by  a  or  e,  and  there  is  sometimes  an  uncertainty 
which  of  the  two  should  be  used.  These  terminations  be- 
long properly  to  Latin  participles  and  verbal  nouns,  and 
come  to  us  either  directly  or  through  the  French.  If  the 
characteristic  of  the  Latin  verb  be  a,  the  result  is  -ance  and 
-anty  the  first  of  which  makes  a  noun,  the  second  an  adjective. 
Thus  from  the  Latin  abund-a-re,  to  abound,  are  formed  : 

Latin,  abundantia  English,  abundance 

"      abundant-s  "         abundant 

So  verbs  whose  characteristics  are  e  or  /  yield  forms  that  are 
regular : 

sil-e-re  silence,  silent 

sal-i-re  salience,  salient 

conven-i-re  convenience,  convenient 

The  still  greater  number  characterized  by  consonants 
ought  regularly  to  furnish  -etice  and  -ent  : 

string-'-re  stringence,  stringent 

solv-'-re  solvency,  solvent 

resid-*-re  residence,  resident 

but  usage,  formerly  very  unsettled,  is  still  by  no  means  con- 
sistent. We  have  from  consonant  verbs  affiance,  affiant, 
ascendant,  defendant,  attendance,  attendant,  repcnta7ice,  re- 
pentant, and  many  others.  This  irregularity  is  due  to  the 
passage  of  these  words  through  the  French  language.  A 
few  words  have  both  forms,  as  confidence,  confident,  and  con- 
fidant;  dependence,  dependent,  and  dependant.  In  such  cases 
the  form  in  -atit  is  treated  as  a  noun,  and  that  in  -ent  as  an 
adjective. 

17.  A  number  of  verbs  ending  in  -ize  are  formed  either 
from  or  in  imitation  of  Greek  verbs  in  -izo.  Agonize,  baptize. 


i86 


The  English  Language. 


dogmatize,  ostracize,  syllogize,  are  examples  of  those  from 
similar  Greek  words.  Eulogize,  analyze,  paralyze,  are  from 
Greek  originals  not  ending  in  -izo.  Civilize,  detonize,  judaize, 
mesmerize,  naturalize,  realize,  spiritualize,  are  various  imita- 
tions. The  manner  of  writing  these  words  has  never  been 
uniform.  We  generally  find  catechise  and  exorcise,  although 
from  Greek  originals  in  -izo.  In  this  country  the  greater 
part  are  written  with  -ize ;  the  following  are  the  principal 
exceptions,  of  which  only  two  are  from  the  Greek : 


advertise 

comprise 

divertise 

misprise 

advise 

criticise 

emprise 

premise 

affranchise 

compromise 

enfranchise 

reprise 

apprise 

demise 

enterprise 

revise 

catechise 

despise 

exercise 

supervise 

chastise 

devise 

exorcise 

surmise 

circumcise 

disguise 

improvise 

surprise 

In  England  the  tendency  is  to  write  them  all  with  -ise. 

1 8.  Words  introduced  into  the  language  from  any  source 
are  treated  for  a  time  as  strangers,  and  allowed  to  retain 
something  of  their  foreign  look  and  sound.  This  is  particu- 
larly true  of  the  Italian  terms  relating  to  music  and  painting 
and  the  French  phrases  used  by  people  of  fashion.  Although 
these  foreign  features  are  gradually  effaced  by  long  and 
common  use,  they  are  still  one  of  the  two  principal  causes 
of  the  discordance  between  pronunciation  and  spelling,  of 
which  asthma,  bayou,  Bootes,  Canaanite,  catsup,  chapeau, 
cognac,  corps,  rei,  schorl,  are  examples. 

When  a  word  comes  through  one  language,  from  another, 
it  is  sometimes  a  question  which  of  the  two  should  deter- 
mine its  form.  The  largest  element  in  our  language  is 
Latin,  that  has  reached  us  through  a  transforming  French 
medium.  In  general  the  French  is  followed,  especially  in 
England  ;  but  in  this  country  there  is  sometimes  a  disposi- 
tion to  revert  to  the  earlier  type.  One  class  of  more  than  a 
hundred  words  begin  with  French  en  or  Latin  in,  like  enclose, 
or  inclose,  enquire  or  inquire.  They  seem  to  be  the  sport  of 
chance,  yet  in  most  instances  a  preference  is  shown  for  one 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


187 


form  rather  than  the  other,  favoring  e  in  England,  and  in 
this  country  inclining  to  i. 

There  is  another  class  with  numerous  imitations,  the  origi- 
nal members  of  which  ended  in  Latin  in  -or,  changed  to  -eur 
in  French,  adopted  into  English  as  -our,  and  now  in  America 
reverting  to  the  orginal  -or. 


LATIN 

FRENCH 

ENGLISH 

AMERICAN 

candor 

candeur 

candour 

candor 

color 

coleur 

colour 

color 

dolor 

doleur 

dolour 

dolor 

error 

erreur 

errour 

error 

factor 

facteur 

factour 

factor 

favor 

faveur 

favour 

favor 

fervor 

ferveur 

fervour 

fervor 

honor 

honneur 

honour 

honor 

odor 

odeur 

odour 

odor 

19.  In  all  cases  of  doubt  consult  the  dictionaries.  If  they 
be  hopelessly  at  variance,  the  only  resource  left  to  the  stu- 
dent is  to  observe  the  spelling  of  the  best  recent  writers,  and 
exercise  his  own  judgment. 


ACCENT. 


In  a  word  of  more  than  one  syllable  some  one  is  uttered 
more  forcibly  than  the  others.  That  additional  force  or 
stress  is  what  is  here  called  accent.  It  is  much  more  marked 
in  some  languages  than  in  others.  In  those  that  are  faintly 
accented  the  words  and  syllables  ripple  along  in  what  seems 
to  us  a  lazy  droning  fashion  without  spirit  or  force.  It  matters 
not  how  long  the  words  may  be,  as  the  oral  speech  seems 
scarcely  divisible  into  words,  but  to  be  drawn  along  before 
us  like  the  successive  links  of  a  chain,  or  a  string  of  uniform 
beads.  On  the  other  hand,  our  language  is  very  strongly 
accented,  and  seems  to  foreigners  irregular,  jerky,  sputtering, 
and  quarrelsome.  We  think  that  the  strength  of  our  lan- 
guage, as  the  emphasis  of  earnest  speech,  is  laid  on  the 
accented  syllables. 


1 88  The  English  Language. 

In  many  languages  the  accent  is  always  near  the  end  of 
the  word,  in  others  near  the  beginning,  while  a  few,  like 
ours,  seem  to  distribute  it  with  a  show  of  impartiality.  All 
attempts  to  assign  rules  for  the  place  of  the  accent  in  Eng- 
lish only  serve  to  render  the  subject  hopelessly  intricate  and 
confused.  Still  some  leading  tendencies  may  be  discovered, 
and  where  the  confusion  is  inextricable  the  cause  of  that 
confusion  may  be  found.  The  principal  cause  is  the  compo- 
site character  of  the  language.  There  is  first  what  may  be 
called  the  native  element — either  Anglo-Saxon  in  origin,  or 
developed  in  English  at  an  early  period.  About  the  pro- 
nunciation of  this  portion  all  are  agreed.  Then  there  are  the 
multitude  of  words  from  Greek,  Latin,  and  foreign  languages, 
altogether  strange  at  first  to  the  body  of  the  people. 

Let  us  then  in  the  first  place  see  if  we  can  discover  any 
principle  regulating  the  accent  in  the  native  part  of  the  lan- 
guage. I  remark  in  passing  that  the  place  of  the  accent  is 
usually  denoted  in  English  books  by  the  mark  (')  thus 
ty'rant,  embit'ter,  require' ;  that  its  place  is  reckoned  from 
the  last,  or  ultimate,  syllable  ;  that  the  one  next  to  the  last 
is  called  the  penultimate,  or,  for  shortness,  penult ;  the  sec- 
ond from  the  last,  antepenult,  and  the  one  before  \}ci2L\.,  pre  an- 
tepenultimate. Beginning  then  with  native  words  of  two 
syllables,  as  the  simplest,  we  readily  discover  three  tenden- 
cies, quite  independent,  and  sometimes  competing  with  each 
other.  The  first  is  to  accent  the  principal  syllable,  where 
there  is  much  disparity.  It  could  scarcely  be  otherwise. 
Awake,  at  hirst,  bestride  must  be  accented  on  the  second 
syllable,  if  at  all,  and  stranger,  proudly,  on  the  first.  The 
second  tendency  is  to  accent  the  first  syllable,  if  there  be  no 
marked  inequality.  Thus  pairs  of  syllables  that  are  mere 
variants  of  each  other,  as  hob-nob,  criss-cross,  hodge-podge, 
hum-drum,  pic-nic,  see-saw,  are  all  accented  on  the  first  sylla- 
ble. So  are  chaffinch,  chilblain,  distaff,  daylight,  foresight, 
larboard,  starboard,  lukewarm,  merm,aid,  nothing,  onslaught, 
and  many  others,  in  which  the  second  syllable  by  itself 
requires  the  most  effort  to  articulate.  I  have  before  me  a 
list  of  the  principal  independent  native  dissyllables  in  the 


Pronunciation  and  spelling,  189 

language,  amounting  to  955,  of  which  763  are  accented  on 
the  first  syllable.  If  the  derivatives  formed  by  the  suffixes 
ed,  er,  es,  est,  isk,  ist,  ly,  etc.,  were  counted,  several  thousands 
would  be  added  to  the  list  of  penultimate  accents,  and  not 
one  to  the  ultimate.  As  it  is,  of  the  192  words  accented  on 
the  last  syllable,  104  are  made  with  the  weak  prefixes  a  and 
be — abide,  become,  etc.  The  third  tendency  is  to  accent  verbs 
on  the  last  syllable.  This  will  be  best  shown  by  contrasting 
nouns  and  verbs  in  which  the  first  syllable  is  the  same  : 


fore'-foot 

fore-go' 

out'-break 

out-bid' 

fore'-ground 

fore-know' 

out'-come 

out-do' 

fore '-hand 

fore-arm' 

out'-let 

out-go' 

fore'-head 

fore-cast' 

out'-look 

out-grow' 

fore'-land 

fore-show' 

out'-house 

out-live' 

fore'man 

fore-stair 

out'-law 

out-run' 

fore'-sight 

fore-tell' 

out'-works 

out-wit' 

This  last  tendency  sufficiently  accounts  for  our  meeting  with 
words  of  foreign  origin,  like  contract,  which  when  used  as 
nouns  are  accented  on  the  first  syllable,  and  on  the  last 
when  they  are  verbs.  The  final  accents  are  nearly  all  due  to 
weak  prefixes  or  the  use  of  the  words  as  verbs. 

Passing  next  to  native  English  trisyllables,  I  find  in  Skeat's 
Dictionary  125.  The  number  in  the  largest  American  dic- 
tionaries is  much  greater  by  including  those  formed  by 
adding  suffixes,  which  have  the  effect,  as  before,  of  throw- 
ing the  accent  back  towards  the  beginning.  Of  the  125, 
inasmuch,  insomuch,  and  upsidedown  may  be  left  out,  as 
being  phrases  rather  than  words.  There  would  then  remain 
58  accented  on  the  first  syllable,  22  on  the  second,  and  42 
on  the  last.  Of  this  last  division,  36  are  verbs  ;  overworn, 
overwrought,  and  unaneled  are  participles,  with  ultimate 
accent  because  of  their  verbal  character.  The  remaining 
three  words,  overhead,  oi'ermuch,  and  overwise,  have  the 
character  of  composite  phrases.  There  is  not  a  noun  in  the 
list  of  42.  Of  the  22  accented  on  the  middle  syllable,  10 
are  verbs,  7  have  the  weak  first  syllables  a-,  be-,  to-.  The 
other  5,  like  almighty,  already,  are  as  easily  explained,  with 


1 9©  The  English  Language. 

the  exception,  perhaps,  of  newfangled.  There  is  but  one 
noun  in  the  class.  Of  the  58  accented  on  the  first  or  ante- 
penultimate syllable,  there  is  but  one  verb — caterwaul,  in 
which  the  balance  is  nearly  even  between  the  first  and  last. 
By  general  analogy,  it  should  be  ultimate.  That  an  excess 
of  volume  in  the  first  syllable  is  not  essential,  will  be  evident 
from  such  words  as  alderman,  bedridden,  didapper,  einberdays, 
forefather,  godmother,  honeycomb,  indwelling,  offscouring. 
The  tendencies  of  English  pronunciation  then  are  such  that, 
of  words  of  three  nearly  equal  syllables,  all  verbs  would  be 
accented  on  the  last  syllable  and  all  the  others  on  the  first. 

Of  native  words  of  more  than  three  syllables,  those 
accented  on  the  first  are  about  three  times  as  numerous 
as  those  accented  on  the  second,  and  these  latter  bear  the 
same  ratio  to  those  having  the  accent  on  the  third,  while 
ultimate  accent  is  limited  to  a  very  small  number  of  verbs. 
This  tendency  to  accent  the  first  syllable  produces  some 
curious  results,  both  in  native  and  adopted  words.  The 
following  are  found  in  the  dictionaries  accented  on  the  first 
syllable : 

almainrivets  caterpillar-catcher       ganglionary 

alveolary  disciplinableness         lachrymatory 

bluestockingness  disputableness  mainpernable 

calculatory  excellency 

calipercompasses  explicableness 

In  very  long  words,  or  words  having  two  syllables  of  con- 
siderable volume  with  a  faint  one  between  them,  there  is  a 
secondary  accent,  or  even  two  or  more,  besides  the  principal 
one — hy'drocyan'ic,  im' mate' rial' ity. 

Besides  the  three  tendencies  above  described,  there  is  a 
fourth,  affecting  words  from  learned  and  foreign  languages. 
So  long  as  they  are  used  only  by  scholars  and  specialists, 
there  is  an  effort  to  keep  up  their  foreign  pronunciation. 
But  they  gradually  percolate  through  the  masses,  who 
naturally  tend  to  assimilate  them  to  their  native  speech.  In 
this  way  there  may  be  two  pronunciations  current  at  the 
same  time.     There  is  a  drug  much  used  in  the  South  and 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


191 


West  that  fashionable  people  call  kin-een' ,  but  which  the 
dictionaries  and  common  folks  call  qui' nine  or  quin'ine.  So 
scholars  say  abdo'men  and  oppo'nent,  but  the  majority  are 
strongly  inclined  to  say  ab'domen  and  op'ponent.  The  battle 
is  fought  over  every  dubious  word  separately,  with  victory 
in  the  long  run  generally  with  the  majority.  It  is  obvious 
that  the  result,  even  when  reached,  must  be  very  irregular. 
Words  that  have  been  long  in  common  use  are  accented  like 
original  English.  Armor,  equal,  rapid,  prophet  are  accented 
on  the  first  syllable  because  that  is  the  general  habit ;  attend, 
impend,  combine  are  accented  on  the  last,  for  the  double  rea- 
son that  they  are  verbs  and  the  last  syllable  is  the  heaviest. 
The  English  tendency  to  accent  the  first  syllable  has  sub- 
stituted an  antepenult  accent  for  a  penult  in  many  words, 
and  in  others  the  change  is  in  progress,  there  being  one 
pronunciation  by  scholars  and  another  by  people  in  general. 


ora'tor 

sena'tor 

cica'trix 

abdo'men 

minis'ter 

pletho'ra 

cogno'men 

muse'um 


or'ator 

sen'ator 

cic'atrix 

ab'domen 

minister 

pleth'ora 

cog'nomen 

mu'seum 


lyce'um 

anemo'ne 

elegi'ac 

eurocly'don 

charac'ter 

dysen'tery 

panthe'on 

thea'tre 

umbili'cus 


ly'ceum 

anem'one 

ele'giac 

euroc'lydon 

char'acter 

dys'entery 

pan'theon 

the  atre 

umbiricus 


An  example  of  this  gradual  naturalization  is  furnished  by 
a  group  of  very  recent  botanical  terms  ending  in  phyllum.  or 
phyllous — Greek  cpvXKov,  a  leaf, — about  which  the  authorities 
are  much  at  variance  : 


adenophyllous 

anthophyllous 

aphyllous 

caryophyllum 

coleophyllous 

decaphyllous 

endecaphyllous 

endophyllous 


epiphyllous 

exophyllous 

gamophyllous 

heptaphyllous 

heterophyllous 

hypophyllous 

hexaphyllous 

macrophyllous 


microphyllous 

monophyllous 

myriaphyllous 

pentaphyllous 

podophyllum 

polyphyllous 

rhizophyllous 

tetraphyllous,  etc. 


192  The  English  Language. 

From  the  double  /  near  the  termination  they  ought  all  to 
have  the  penult  accent,  but  probably  more  people  say 
caryoph'yllum  than  caryophyl'lum. 

As  most  words  derived  from  Greek  and  Latin  have  lost 
the  final  syllable  in  the  process  of  adoption,  the  original 
accent  is  often  displaced  by  that  means.  The  accentuation 
is  then  left  to  be  determined  chiefly  by  the  last  two  sylla- 
bles. When  they  have  sufBcient  volume  and  weight,  if  we 
may  use  such  an  expression,  they  retain  the  accent  on  the 
penult,  as  in  effulgence,  embrasure,  indulgence,  inconclusive, 
superstructure,  hermeneutic,  pczdobaptism,  otherwise  it  will  be 
drawn  towards  the  beginning  of  the  word.  Elaborate  rules 
are  sometimes  given  for  determining  the  place  of  the  accent, 
which  are  well  exemplified  by  the  terminal  analysis  of  Greek, 
Latin,  and  Scripture  proper  names  given  by  Walker  and 
Worcester.  The  latter  gives  558  divisions,  or  rules,  exhibit- 
ing no  principle,  useless  for  reference,  and  impossible  to  re- 
member. Sixty  of  the  classes  contain  each  only  one  word. 
It  was  of  such  wasted  labor  that  Dr.  Latham  said  :  "  The 
voice  of  a  ruler  of  rules  is  a  sound  to  flee  from." 

A  native  word,  no  matter  how  long,  VC^q  caterpillar  catcher , 
retains  all  its  original  syllables  unbroken,  so  that  it  is  in- 
stantly recognized  ;  but  a  word  from  Latin,  Greek,  or  Hebrew 
is  often  taken  to  pieces  and  put  together  again  in  a  quite 
different  manner,  and  that  too  generally  for  the  purpose  of 
moving  the  accent  towards  the  beginning.  From  kaletidce 
and  grapho,  a  hybrid  word,  kal-en-dog' raph-er  was  once  made, 
the  most  important  syllable  of  which  was  dog,  that  did  not 
appear  in  the  original.     This  practice  is  very  common. 

Ab  melech  A-^m'-e-lech  equa  anima  e-qua-«zV;z'-i-ty 

anti  phrasis  an-/?})A'-ra-sis  di  pteron  dip'-tera. 

anti  strophe  an-Z/j'-tro-phe  grandi  loquor  grsm-dl/  -o-quent 

anthropo  phago  an-thro-/^/<'-a-gi  Jeho  shaphat  Je-ZiosA'-a-phat 

cami  voro  car-«Jt/'-o-rous  therme  metron  ther-mom' -e-ter 

The  accented  syllable  of  such  compound  words  therefore  is 
made  up  of  the  last  letters  of  the  first  part  and  the  first 
letters  of  the  second. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  19^ 

ENGLISH  AND  AMERICAN  USAGES. 

There  are  at  present  a  few  points  of  difference  between 
the  spellings  current  in  England  and  in  this  country,  which, 
although  not  uniform,  are  tolerably  well  maintained.  Web- 
ster's Dictionary,  and  those  who  follow  its  guidance,  diverge 
the  most  widely  from  EngHsh  usage,  while  some  of  the  dif- 
ferences are  due  to  changes  now  in  progress  in  the  older 
country.  The  points  in  question  may  be  each  illustrated  by 
two  words  as  well  as  by  many. 


■ze, 

dogmatise 

dogmatize 

« 

ostracise 

ostracize 

a 

connexion 

connection 

it 

inflexion 

inflection 

or 

ardour 

ardor 

<( 

favour 

favor 

// 

enrolment 

enrollment 

« 

fulfil 

fulfill 

/ 

traveller 

traveler 

« 

jewellery 

jewelry 

our 

« 

« 


In  regard  to  the  first  it  does  not  appear  on  what  principle 
one  should  write  baptize  with  z,  and  dogmatise  with  s,  since 
both  are  from  Greek  verbs  ending  in  izo.  If  verbs  so  de- 
rived were  written  with  z  and  all  the  others  with  j,  it  would 
be  intelligible.  The  second  pair  of  words  are  from  the 
Latin  connexio  and  inflexio ;  and  in  regard  to  all  words  so 
derived  the  English  practice  is  correct.  Those  in  our  are  so 
written  to  show  that  they  come  from  the  Latin  or,  through 
the  French  eur ;  but  English  usage  is  not  uniform  on  this 
point.  Richardson,  like  most  others,  gives  the  preference  to 
errour,  but  in  the  authorities  he  cites  it  occurs  five  times  as 
erroiir  and  four  times  as  error.  Skeat  (1884)  writes  err^r 
and  says  that  the  spelling  has  been  changed  to  make  it 
niore  like  the  Latin ;  and  that  is  just  what  we  in  America 
are  doing  with  that  whole  class  of  words.  Jewellery  and 
jewelry  are   the   most  divergent,  but  the  American  form 

follows  the  analogy  of  chivalry,  rivalry,  devilry,  chapelry, 
13 


194  1^^^^  English  Language. 

and,  what  is  more  to  the  point,  revelry,  for  I  suppose  no 
EngHshman  writes  revellery.  The  aim  of  educated  Ameri- 
cans is  to  make  the  language  more  simple,  consistent,  and 
easy  to  use. 

It  is  a  question  how  far  Americans  are  under  obliga- 
tion to  adopt  new  forms  of  expression  originating  in  Eng- 
land, or  even  to  retain  old  ones.  We  are  generally  prone 
enough  to  imitate,  even  in  things  so  little  deserving  of  imita- 
tion as  the  ever-changing  styles  of  arranging  our  clothing, 
hair,  and  beards  ;  and  there  are  even  Anglomaniacs  who 
assert  that  no  amount  or  unanimity  of  mere  American  usage 
can  render  a  word  or  expression  legitimate.  But  from  be- 
fore the  dawn  of  history  families  have  been  separating,  send- 
ing out  colonizing  swarms  eastward  and  westward  to  conquer 
and  settle  strange  lands  ;  and  these  in  their  new  homes  have 
developed  new  languages,  laws,  and  institutions,  and  new 
types  of  character.  In  this  way  have  been  formed  all  the 
languages  spoken  on  the  globe.  It  is  the  way  of  all  the 
world,  and  the  fear  of  criticasters  will  not  alter  it.  Our 
ancestors  brought,  with  the  language  and  laws,  the  general 
physical  and  spiritual  make-up  of  English  and  Scottish  men 
and  women  of  the  useful  classes,  and  were  for  a  time  a  mere 
appendage  to  the  parent  country.  We  rightfully  inherit  all 
that  was  prior  to  the  separation.  Whatever  date  may  be 
assigned  for  that  event,  it  is  clear  that  by  this  time  we  have 
emerged  from  the  state  of  marsupial  nutrition.  If  the 
highest  European  culture  is  rarely  or  never  reached  in 
this  country,  there  are  probably  more  persons  in  America 
who  can  appreciate  and  enjoy  good  English  than  in  all  the 
British  Islands.  Whatever  commends  itself  to  our  judg- 
ment and  taste,  and  is  suited  to  our  wants,  should  be  wel- 
comed, from  whatever  source  it  may  emanate ;  all  else  can 
be  left  to  those  to  whose  different  circumstances  it  may 
be  adapted.  It  is  not  apparent  why  the  example  of  an 
English  writer  should  be  more  binding  upon  us  than  the 
decision  of  an  English  judge.  Deserving  of  careful  and 
respectful  consideration  both  may  be,  but  obUgatory  they 
are  not. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  195 

ANOMALIES   OF  PRONUNCIATION   AND   SPELLING. 

After  all  that  can  be  said  in  the  way  of  general  principles, 
tendencies,  or  rules,  there  is  still  outstanding  a  considerable 
amount  of  irregularity,  especially  in  proper  names,  that  can 
only  be  treated  item  by  item.  Some  are  words  written 
according  to  pronunciations  long  abandoned,  and  others  are 
foreign  importations  not  yet  assimilated.  We  should  natu- 
rally look  in  the  dictionaries  for  them,  but  as  no  one  will 
make  a  general  search,  a  very  inadequate  idea  will  be  formed 
of  the  amount  of  the  irregularity.  Some  would  not  be  found 
by  seeking,  and  of  others  the  treatment  is  very  unsatisfac- 
tory. Webster  gives  Dd-el\  and  Worcester  De-el',  as  the 
pronunciation  of  Dalzell ;  and  Webster  has  the  following : 
"  Strath'-spey,  n.  [Denominated  from  the  county  of  Strath- 
spey, in  Scotland,  as  having  been  first  used  there]."  On  this 
last  example,  I  remark,  first,  that,  as  given,  it  is  nearly  un- 
pronounceable ;  secondly,  that  it  is  incorrect ;  and  thirdly, 
that  Strathspey  is  not  a  county,  but  merely  the  valley  of  the 
river  Spey,  extending  through  or  into  Elgin,  Banff,  and 
Inverness  shires.  Strath,  like  glen,  signifies  merely  a  valley, 
and  prefixed  to  the  local  name  is  never  accented.  There 
are  more  than  a  dozen  such  in  Scotland.  The  th  is  pro- 
nounced before  vowels,  as,  Strathallan,  Strath-aven,  Strath- 
earn,  but  is  not  heard  before  consonants  in  Strathbogie, 
Strathdon,  Strathinore,  Strathspey.  The  ey  in  Spey  is  nearly 
but  not  quite  the  ay  in  day.  It  is  the  Spanish  ey  in  rey, 
which  may  be  attained  by  sounding  both  vowels  separately. 

I  omit  here  the  Italian  terms  learned  as  a  part  of  educa- 
tion in  music  and  painting,  and  also  the  numerous  French 
phrases  daily  met  with  and  involving  the  whole  subject  of 
French  pronunciation,  to  be  learned  only  from  a  living 
teacher. 

It  will  be  necessary  here  to  add  a  little  to  the  notation  on 
page  144.  A  smaller  type  or  a  curved  mark  will  denote  the 
short,  faint,  obscure  sound  of  the  vowels  a,  e,  i,  0,  u.  Ob- 
scure e  is  equal  to  a  faint  /,  and  the  others  incline  to  the 
obscure  neutral  u. 


196 


TTie  English  Language. 


There  are  a  considerable  number  of  Greek  words  in  which 
a  final  e  is  sounded — diastole,  epitome,  strophe  hyperbole,  syn- 
cope, and  others.  There  are  also  a  few  from  the  Latin — dele, 
finale,  optiine,  rationale,  secale,  vice,  etc. 

The  termination  es  in  English  =  s  after y,  k,  p,  t,  th,  :=■  zox 
ez  in  all  other  cases,  in  Spanish  words  =  es  ;  but  in  words  that 
retain  an  original  Greek  or  Latin  form  it  is  commonly,  though 
not  with  entire  correctness,  pronounced  eez. 

Words  containing  any  form  of  the  Greek  Z(^ov,  an  animal, 
separate  the  vowels — epi-zo-ot-ic,  not  ep-i-zoot-ic. 

The  abbreviation  cor.  in  the  following  list  denotes  a  pro- 
nunciation correct  but  not  common. 


aCCOmpt,  pron.  account. 

aches,  aiks. 

aggerate,gg  =  j. 

Aino,  iino,  a  man  of  the  Kurile 
Islands. 

aisle,  ill. 

answer,  w  silent. 

apophthegm,  ap-6-them. 

assoilzie,  as-soii'-ye,  to  ab- 
solve. 

asthma,  as'-ma  or  az'-ma. 

avoirdupois,  voir  =  viir.     . 

aye. 

bagnio,  ban'-yo. 

balmoral,  bal-mor'-^. 

bass,  bais. 

bayou,  bii'-uu. 

beauiin,  bif -in. 

bechamel,  besh'-a-mel,  a  kind 
of  broth. 

beguine,  beg'-in,  a  nun  of  a 
certain  order. 

bijou,  bl-zhuu'. 

boatswain,  boa'-sln. 

Bootes,  Bo-o'-teez. 

bowls,  bowls,  a  game.  English. 


brevier,    bre-veer,   a    size  of 

type. 
Canaanite. 

caoutchouc,  kuu'-chuuk. 
cap-er-cail-zie,  2  =  j. 
cascalho,  kas-kal-yo,  gravel. 
catechise. 
cateran,kai-ter-an,  or  kait-rSn, 

a  Highland  outlaw. 
caviare,  ka-veer',  ka-vee-ar'. 
cento,  chento,  medley  of  verses. 
challis,  shal'-ly,  a  fine  woollen 

fabric. 
chamber, 
chapeau,  shap-o. 
charpie,  sharp-y,  picked  lint. 
choir,  kwiir. 

chose,  shoaz,  a  legal  term. 
chough,  chuf. 
Christ, 
chute,  shuut. 
cicerone,  chee-ch§-ro'-ny. 
cicesbeo,  chee-ches-bai'-o. 
cinchona,  cor.  sin-choa'-na. 
cinquecento,  chink-wai-chent- 

o,  abbreviation  of  (a.d.)  1500. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


^m 


circuit,  cuit  =  cut. 

cocagne,  kok-ain',Lubberland. 

cognac,  koan-yak,  brandy. 

colander,  kul'-en-der. 

colewort)  kol-ard,  Southern 
U.  S. 

colonel,  kur-nel. 

color,  kul'-ur. 

comptroller,  comp  =  con. 

concetto,  kon-chet'-o,  a  con- 
ceit. 

conch,  konk. 

concierge,  kon-sarj',  a  janitor. 

conduit,  kon'-dit. 

condyle,  kon-dil. 

consigne,  kon-seen',  a  coun- 
tersign. 

conversazione,  kon-ver-sat- 
see-o'-nai. 

COquina,  ko-kee-na,  a  cockle. 

Cordillera,  kor-deel-yai'-ra. 

corps,  koar. 

cortege,  kor-taizh. 

Cortes,  Kor'-tes,  Spanish  par- 
liament. 

cotillon,  ko-til'-yun. 

counterfeit,  feit  =  fit. 

coyote,  koi-oa'-tai,  prairie 
wolf. 

creux,  km,  cor.  krti,  intaglio. 

cuirass,  kwee'-ras. 

cuish,  kwis,  and  kwish,  armor 
for  the  thigh. 

cupboard,  kub'-urd. 

Curasao,  kuu-ra-so',  name  of 
a  cordial. 

Cymric,  kim'-rik.    Welsh. 

5y  pres,  see  prai,  a  legal  term. 

Czar,  cor.  tsar. 

Czarina,  cor.  tsar-ee'-na. 


dengue,  deng'-gai,  a  rheumatic 

fever. 
disciple,  would  be  better  ac- 
cented on  the  first  syllable. 
discompt,  dis>kownt'. 
does,  duz. 
door,  floor,  etc. 
edegm,    and     many    others, 

with  g  silent  before  m  ;  all 

Greek, 
enfeoff,  en-fef,  a  legal  term. 
English,  e  =  i. 
estrama^on,     es-tram'-a-son, 

a  small  sword,  a  sax. 
extraordinary,  aor  =  or. 
eyas,    //'-as,    an     unfledged 

hawk. 
fagade,  9  =  s. 
feod,  fyuud,  a  legal  term. 
ferrule,  fer'-il. 

fiord,  or  fjord,  fyoard,  a  nar- 
row inlet  of  the  sea. 
fiysch,  fliVsh,  a  certain  series 

of  rocks. 
forehead,  for'-ed 
foreign,  for'-in. 
forfeit,  for'-flt. 
fuchsia,       commonly      fyuu'- 

shee-a,  cor.  fuux'-ee-a,  from 

which  fuchsine. 
fyst,  f«s,  a  little  dog.      South. 

U.S. 
gaberlunzie,   gab-er-luun'-ye, 

a  beggar's  wallet 
gaol,  jail. 
gaucho,  gow'-cho,  a  native  of 

the  pampas. 
gauge,  gaij. 
geyser,  g//'-ser. 
giaour,  jowr. 


198 


The  English  Language. 


glamour,  cor.  glam'-ur.  In 
the  35th  chapter  of  the  Gret- 
tis  Saga  it  is  related  how 
Grettir  fought  with  and  over- 
came the  ghost  of  an  un- 
believing heathen  named 
Glam,  The  hero  never  re- 
covered from  the  effects  of 
the  contest,  but  ever  after 
saw  ghosts  at  night,  and  it 
become  a  common  saying 
that  Glam  had  cast  a  glamour 
over  any  one  who  saw  what 
was  not  to  be  seen.  This 
was  written  about  a.d.  1300. 

groschen,  gro'-shen,  a  small 
German  coin. 

guanaco,  gwa-naa'-ko,  a 
species  of  llama. 

guano,  gwaa'-no. 

guava,  gwaa'-va. 

guerdon,  ger-don,  a  reward. 

guerillero,  ger-eel-yai'-ro. 

guinea. 

guitar,  gee-tar'. 

gunwale,  gun'-el. 

halfpenny,  hap'-eny  or  hai-' 
pen-y, 

halser,  haw'-ser 

han't,  hant,  or  haint. 

hautboy,  hoa'-boy. 

Hawaiian,  hawii-yan,  cor. 
Haa-waa-ee-yan. 

heather,  hedh-er. 

heifer,  hef-er. 

hiccough. 

hidalgo-,  ee-dal'-go. 

hornito,  or-nee'-to. 

hough,  hok. 

housewife,  huz'-if. 

humor,  yuu-mflr. 


hussy,  huz-y. 

imbroglio,  im-broal'-yoa. 

improvisatore,  final  e  sound- 
ed. 

improvisatrice,  -tree-chy. 

indict,  in-d«t. 

intaglio,  in-tal'-yoa,  engrav- 
ing cut  in,  as  of  a  seal. 

ipecacuanha,  cor.  ip-ai-kak- 
uu-an-ya. 

iron,  i-um. 

island,  isle,  s  silent. 

isocheim,  «'-so-kzVm. 

isosceles,  //-sos'-el-eez. 

jaquima,  ha-kee'-ma,  a  head- 
stall for  breaking  horses, 
West.  U.  S. 

jarl,  yarl,  Norse  for  earl. 

judgment,  etc.,^  =y  before  m. 

keelson,  kel-s6n,  the  interior 
counterpart  of  a  ship's  keel. 

kilo,  kee'-lo,  contraction  for 
kilogram. 

knowledge,  knowl  =  nol. 

kreutzer,  kroit-zer,  a  Ger.coin. 

lammergeyer,  -gzV-er. 

laugh,  laf. 

lazzarone,  lad-zar-oa'-ny,  a 
ragamuffin. 

leeward,  luu-^rd. 

ley  =  lye. 

Leyden,  hV-den. 

lieutenant,  liv-.    Eng. 

Limoges-ware,  lim-oazh- 

llano,  lyaa'-no,  a  grassy  plain. 

lot'o,  name  of  a  game. 

Lucchese,  Luk'-keez,  people 
of  Lucca. 

machairodus,  Ma-kii'-ro-dus, 
a  fossil  animal  allied  to  the 
bear. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


199 


machine,  ma-sheen'. 
macigno,  ma-cheen'-yoa. 
magazine,  -zeen. 
maguey,  ma-gwai,  great  Mex. 

aloe. 
Magyar,  mad'-yar. 
Maharajah,  ma-ha-raa'-jah,  a 

prince  of  India. 
mahout,     ma-howt',    an    ele- 
phant driver. 
maleic,  mai-lee'-ik,  a  form   of 

malic  acid. 
manada,  ma-naa'-da,  a  herd 

of  mares. 
manceuvre,  ma-nuu'-ver. 
mantua-maker,  tua  =  tu. 
maraschino,    ma-ras-kee'-no, 

a  cherry  cordial. 
marine. 

marline,  mar'-Iin. 
mascagnin,         mas-kan'-yin, 

name  of  a  mineral. 
mate,  maa'-tai,  Paraguay  tea. 
matico,  ma-tee'-ko,  a  medici- 
nal plant  of  Peru. 
meerschaum,      mair'-showm, 

likely  to  become  meer'-shum 

or  mur-shum. 
mesa,  mes'-a,  an  elevated  plain, 

West.  U.  S. 
mesne,  meen,  a  legal  term. 
mesquite,     mes-kee'-tai,      or 

mes-keet',  a  species  of  tree, 

also  of  grass,  Texas. 

a  cross  be- 

mestino,   -tee-no 


mestizo,    -tee-zo 


tween   a 

I-     Creole 

and  an 

Indian. 

mezzorilievo,      med-zoa-ree- 
lee-ai'-voa. 


mezzotinto,  med-zoa-tint'-oa. 

mirage,  mee-raazh'. 

mise,  meez,  a  legal  term. 

misle,  mizl,  a  fine  rain. 

mistle,  mizl,  a  fine  rain. 

mochila,  moa-chee'-la,  a  sad- 
dle-flap, West.  U.  S. 

monte,  mon'-tai,  name  of  a 
game. 

morne,  mor-nai,  a  term  in 
heraldry. 

mortgagor,  mor-ga-jor'. 

mosquito, 

muezzin,  mwed-zin,  one  who 
calls  to  prayer  among  the 
Moslems. 

muscle,  mus-H. 

nephew,  Eng.  nev'-yuu. 

neve,  nai-vai,  upper  part  of  a 
glacier. 

nowed,  nuud,  knotted.  Her- 
aldry. 

oboe,  oa'-boa-ee,  a  wind  in- 
strument. 

often,  soften,  etc.,  /  silent. 

Oglio,  olla,  oal'-ya,  a  stew,  lit. 
a  pot. 

olla  podrida,  poa-dree-da. 

pachisi,  pa-chee'-zy,  an  Indian 
game. 

pali,  paa'-lee,  an  ancient  Hin- 
doo language. 

pall-mall,  pel-mel. 

paradigm,  g  silent. 

paradis,  -dee,  a  wet  dock. 

parapegm,  g  silent,  an  ancient 
form  of  placard. 

parasceve,  pa-ra-see'-vee,  the 
eve  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath. 

paraselene,  final  e  sounded, 
a  mock  moon. 


2CX) 


The  English  Language. 


parliament,  a  silent. 
patois,  pat'-wa,  a    dialect   or 

brogue. 
peirameter,     )    .  _  ^ 
peirastic,         j-  ei  - 1. 
peso,  pai'-so,  a  Spanish  dollar. 
petate,    pai-taa'-tai,     a    palm 

mat. 
petit,  pet-y. 
Pharaoh,  aoh  =  o. 
phlegm,  g  silent. 
phosphenes,  fos'-fee-nez,  the 

lights  seen  under  pressure  on 

the  eyeball. 
pibroch,  cor.    pee'-brukh,  the 

war-tune  of  a  Highland  clan. 
picarisque,      ) 
picturesque,    [  ^^^  =  k. 
pico,  pee-ko,  a  mountain  peak, 
pise,  pee'-zai,  a  wall  of  rammed 

earth. 
pita,  pee'-ta,  fibre  of  the  Mex. 

aloe. 
playa,  plaa-zha,  the  sea-shore. 
plaza,      plaa-tha,      a     public 

square. 
pluries,     pluu'-ri-eez,      many 

times. 
poe,  poa'-ee,  root  of  the  taro 

plant. 
polemarch,  pol'-em-ark,  Athe- 
nian minister  of  war. 
police,  po-lees'. 
pomegranate,  pome  =  pum. 
porpoise,    portoise,     tortoise, 

poise,  toise  =  pus,  tiz  or  tis. 
pose,  poa-zai,  attitude.     Her- 
aldry, 
pozzulana,      pod-zuu-laa'-na, 

a  hydraulic  cement. 
precis,  prai-see,  an  abstract. 


projet,  proa-zhai,  a  scheme  or 
plan. 

provost,  proa-voa,  title  of  an 
officer. 

pueblo,  pweb'-lo,  a  Span.- 
Amer.  village. 

puisne,  pyuu-ny,  cor.  pwee* 
nai. 

pulque,  puul'-kai,  a  Mexican 
drink. 

quaich,  cor.  kwaikh,  a  wooden 
drinking  cup. 

quay,  kee. 

queue,  kyuu. 

quipu,  kee'-puu,  a  knotted 
cord  to  remember  by. 

realm,  relm. 

reata,  rai-aa'-ta,  a  lasso,  Cali- 
fornia. 

rei,  e  as  in  there,  /  as  in  ma-: 
chine,  a  Portuguese  coin. 

reiter,  r/V-ter,  Ger.  a  horse- 
man. 

rendezvous,  ran-dai-vuu. 

resume,  rai-zuu-mai,  a  sum- 
ming up. 

rilievo,  ree-lee-ai'-vo,  relief  in 
engraving. 

rodeo,  roa-dai'-o,  a  gathering 
of  cattle,  Western  U.  S. 

sacrifice,  ce  =  z. 

sauerkraut,  au  =  ow. 

Schiedam,  skee'-dam. 

schism,  sizm. 

schlich,  shlik,  a  pulverized  ore. 

schnapps. 

schorl,  a  mineral. 

schottische. 

schreight,  skreet,  a  fish. 

scirrhous,  skir'-us,  a  hard 
cancerous  growth. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


20 1 


se'raglicy,  sai-ral'-yo. 

serai,  sai-raa'-ee,  an  Eastern 
palace  or  lodging. 

Serape,  sai-raa'-pai,  a  Mexican 
blanket  or  shawl. 

seven-night,  sen'-n/Vt. 

sew  and  shew. 

sheol,  shee-oal,  the  old  Hebrew 
place  of  departed  spirits. 

shiite,  a  Mahometan  sectary. 

sierra,  see-er-a,  a  mountain 
range. 

siesta,  see-,  a  nap  at  noon. 

signora,  Seiiora,  see-nyoa- 
ra,  sai-nyoa-ra. 

soften,  /  silent. 

soiree,  swa-rai,  an  evening 
entertainment. 

spa,  spaa,  a  medicinal  spring. 

spahi,  spaa'-hee,  a  Turkish 
trooper. 

sprechery,  sprek-er-y,  cor. 
sprekh,  miscellaneous  plun- 
der. 

spuilzie,  spuul-ye,  spoil,  plun- 
der. 

Stiacciato,  stee-ach-aa'-to,  a 
very  low  relief  in  sculp- 
ture. 

Stomacace,  sto-mak'-a-see,  a 
foul  breath. 

stone,  14  lbs.,  called  in  Eng- 
land stun. 

Storge,  stor'-jee,  parental  af- 
fection. 

sugar,  shuu'-gar. 

Tagliacotian,  Tal-ya-koa'- 
she-an,  Tagliacozzi's  opera- 
tion. 

tailzie,  tail-ye,  a  Scotch  deed 
of  entail 


tazza,  tat-sa,  a  kind  of  vase. 

terzarima,  ter-tsa-ree'-ma,  a 
kind  of  versification. 

thaler,  taa'-ler,  a  German 
dollar. 

threepence,  thrip'-ens. 

tongue,  tung. 

tortilla,  tor-tee-ya,  a  griddle- 
cake. 

travail,  trav'-el. 

treenail,  tren-el,  a  wooden  pin 
in  ship-building. 

tuyere,  tweer,  the  blast-nozzle 
in  a  furnace. 

two-pence,  tup-gns. 

urao,  uu-raa'-o,  natron. 

vaquero,  va-kai'-ro,  a  cow- 
boy. 

verdigris,  ver-di-grees. 

vice,  v//'-see. 

victuals,  vit-als. 

vicuna,  vee-kuun-ya,  a  species 
of  llama. 

vidame,  vee-dam',  a  feudal 
dignitary. 

vide,  v«'-dee,  see. 

viscount,  vii-kownt,  a  title  of 
nobility. 

visne,  veen,  vicinity. 

vomito,  vo-mee'-to,  malignant 
yellow  fever. 

waistcoat,  commonly  wes-kut. 

weigelia,  wii-jeel-ya,  name 
of  a  flowering  shrub. 

who,  huu. 

women,  o  =  i. 

yacht,  yot. 

zollverein,  tsoal-fer-«n,  an 
agreement  among  the  Ger- 
man states  in  regard  to  cus- 
toms duties. 


202 


The  English  Language. 


This  list  will  give  an  idea  of  the  extent  and  character  of 
these  anomalies. 

No  class  of  words  present  greater  irregularities  than  do 
proper  names.  The  following  list  contains  a  good  number 
of  those  met  with  in  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States, 
the  pronunciation  of  which  is  liable  to  be  mistaken.  They 
may  be  presumed  to  be  English,  Scotch,  or  Irish,  unless 
marked  Am.  In  a  few  instances  an  English  and  an  Ameri- 
can pronunciation  are  distinguished.  To  avoid  repetition  it 
may  be  observed  that  in  England  the  termination  -borough  is 
usually  heard  ^s-bro,  -ham  as  -am,  or  rather  -um,  for  the  vowel 
is  very  obscure,  that  stone,  in  any  situation,  is  sUin,  and  that 
ell  does  not  control  the  accent  —  Par'nell,  not  Par-neW . 
Names  having  no  other  peculiarities  than  these  are  omitted. 


Aberdeen,  Ae-ber-deen. 
Abergavenny, 

Ae-ber-gen'-ny. 
Abernethy,  Ae-ber-neth'-y. 
Albuquerque,  Al-buu-ker'-ky. 
Annesley,  Anz'-ly. 
Ascough,  Ask'-yuu. 
Bagehot,  Baj'-ut. 
Balguy,  Baw'-gy, 
Barham,  Bar'-am. 
Beaconsfield,  Bek'-onz-. 
Beall,  Bel.     Am. 
Beauchamp,  Beech'-am. 
Beauclerc,   \^^^j^^^,^>^ 
Beauderk,   ) 
Bedel,  Bid'l. 
Beham,  Bai'-am. 
Belknap,  Bel'-nap. 
Belvoir,  Bee'-ver. 
Berkeley,  Bark-ly. 
Betham,  Beth'-am. 
Bethune,  Bee'-ton. 
Bewick,  Byuu'-ik. 
Bicester,  Bis-ter. 


Am. 


Bligh,     ,gj^^_ 


Blythe,   J 

Blount,  Blunt. 

Boisseau,  Bushel.     Am.  low. 

Boleyn,  B^^l'-en. 

Bolingbroke,  Bol'-ing-bruuk. 

Boscawen,  Bos'-ka-wen. 

Bourke,  Burk. 

Bourne,  Bum. 

Bowdoin,  Boa-din.    Am. 

Bowles,  Boalz. 

Bowring,  Bow-ring. 

Brougham,  Bruum. 

Broune,  Bruun. 

Buchan,  Buk'-an,cor.Bukh-an. 

Bur'nett. 

Bury,  Ber-y. 

Calderon,  Cal'dron. 

Castlereagh,  Kasl'-rai. 

Cavendish,  Kon'-dish. 

Charteris,  Charterz. 

Chisholm,  Chiz-um. 

Cholmeley,        I  chum-ly. 
Cholmondeley, ) 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


203 


Cirencester,  Sis'-is-ter. 
Clanric'arde. 
Clough,  Kluf. 
Cluverius,  Klev'-erz.    Am. 
Cockburn,  Koa-burn. 
Coggeshall,  Kogz-all. 
Coke,  Kuuk. 
Colquhoun,  Kuu-huun. 
Compton,  Kum-ton 
Conyngham,  Kun'-ing-am. 
Coutts,  Kuuts. 
Cowper,  Kuu-per. 
Creighton,  Krai-t6n. 
Crichton,  KnV-ton. 
Dalhousie,  Dal-huu-zy. 
Dalzell,  Dal-yel'. 
Dampier,  Uam'-peer. 
Daviess,  Dai'-vis.     Am. 
Derby,  Dar'-by. 
Derwent,  Dar'-went. 
Des  Vaux,  Dai'-voa. 
Devereux,  Dev'-er-uu. 
Dillwyn,  Dil'-un. 
Douce,  Dows. 
Duchesne,    Eng,    Duu-kaan, 

Am.  Duu-shan. 
Dumaresque,  Dim'-er-ik. 
Du  Plat,  Duu  Plaa'. 
Duyckink,  Dii'-kink. 
Eachard,  Ech'-ard. 
Eadmer,  Ed'-mer. 
Elgin,  not  Eljin. 
Eyre,  Aer. 

Falconer,  )  p^^k-ner. 
Faulkner,  ) 
Farquhar, 

Far'-kwar,  or  Far'-hwar. 
Fiennes,  Fee-enz'. 
Fildes,  Feel'-dez. 
Foljambe,  Ful'-jam. 


Forbes,  For'-bis,     Scotch. 
Freind,  Frend. 
Frelinghuysen, 

Freling-h«-zen. 
Froude,  Fniud. 
Gayarr6,  Gii-ar'-ai. 
Geoghegan,  Gai'-gan. 
Gifford,  Jif'-urd. 
Gill,  not  JUL 
Gill'ott,  not  Jil: 

Glamis,  Glaamz. 
Gleig,  Gleg. 
Gould,  Goald. 
Gower,  Goar, 
Grosvener,  Groav-ner. 


Haigh,    S       ^ 


Halstead,  Hoisted. 
Han'sard. 
Harcourt,  Har-kut. 
Hardinge,  Harding. 
Haughton,  Haw-ton. 
Hem'ans. 
Herries,  Har-is. 
Herthford,  Har'furd. 
Hobart,  Hub-ert. 
Holmes,  Hoamz.    Am. 
Holyoke,  Hoal'-yoak.    Am. 
Hotham,  Huthm. 
Hough,  Huf. 

Houghton,  Hoa-tun.    Am. 
Houston,  Hyuus-ton.      " 
Hoveden,  Huv-den. 
Huger,  Yuu'-jee.    Am. 
Hughes,  Hyuuz. 
Ingelow,  In'-je-loa. 
Ingraham,  Ing'-gram. 
Iz'ard.    Am. 
Jacobi,  Ji-koa'-by. 
Johnstone,  Jon'-s6n. 


204 


The  English  Language. 


VIS. 


Jervaulx,)    ^^,.^. 

Jervis,      J 

Kearney,  Kar'-nee.     Am. 

Keightley,  Keet-ly. 

Keill,  Keel. 

Keith,  Keeth. 

Kennaird'. 

Kennard'. 

Kerr,  Kar. 

Kirkaldy,  Kir-kaw'-dy. 

Knollys,  Noal'-iz. 

Laing,  Lang. 

Layard,  Laird. 

Leathes,  Leeths. 

Leavitt,  Lev-it. 

Leconfield,  Lek'-on-field. 

Ledyard,  Lej-urd. 

Lefevre,  Le-fai-vttr. 

Legar6,  Le-gre6.     Am. 

Leicester,  Les-ter. 

Leigh,  Lee. 

Leighton,  Lai-tun. 

Leland,  Lel'-and,  or  Lee'-land. 

Leveson-Gower,      Luu-s6n- 

goar. 
Lewes,  Luu-is. 
Leyden,  L//'-den. 
Lid'dell. 
Lindsay,  Lin'-zy. 
Ling'ard. 
Lockhart,  Lok'-art. 
Lough,  Luf. 
Lovat,  Luv'-a,t. 
Lucado,  Luk-a-duu'.  Am.  low. 
Mackay,  Mak-y. 
Mahon,  Mai-6n. 
Mainwaring,  Man'-er-ing. 
Majoribanks,  Marsh-banks. 
Marion,  Mar'-ee-6n. 
Mather,  Madh'-er.    Am. 


McKenzie,  cor.  MSk-en'-ye. 
McLeod,  Mak-lowd'. 
Meagher,  Mar.    Irish. 
Meigs,  Megz.    Am. 
Melbourne,  -bum. 
Menzies,  Men-yeez. 
Meredith,  Mere  =  merry. 
Mereweather,  Mere  =  merry. 
Meux,  Myuuz. 
Millais,  Mil-ai. 
Milnes,  Milz. 
Molyneux,  Mol-in-yuuks'. 
Monck,  Munk. 
Monckton,  Munk-ton. 
Monmouth,  Mon'-muth. 
Monson,  Mun-son. 
Montefiore, 

Mon-tai-fee-oa'-ry. 
Montgomery,  Mun-gum'-ry. 
Moray,  Mur'-ai. 
Moultrie,       Muu-tree,      now 

Moal-tree.     Am. 
Mowbray,  Moa'-bry. 
Murchison,  as  written. 
Ogilvie,  Oa'-gil-vy. 
Olmstead,  Um'-sted.     Am. 
O'Shaughnessy,    Oa-Shaw'- 

nes-y. 
Ouless,  Uu'-les. 
Ouseley,  Uuz'-ly. 
Outram,  Uut'-ram. 
Paget,  Paj'-it. 
Palmerston,  Paam'-er-stua 
Pole,  Puul. 
Polk,  Poak.    Am. 
Ponsonby,  Pun-s6n-by,  Punz- 

by. 
Pontefract,  Pom-fret. 
Pouleston,  Pil'-stun. 
Powlett,  Poa'-let. 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling. 


205 


Am. 


Prideaux,  Prid'-o. 
Pugh(e),  Pyuu. 
Pulteney,  Pult-ny. 
Raleigh,  Raw-ly. 
Rantoul,  Ran'-tuul. 
Reay,  Rai. 
Rives,  Reevz.    Am. 
Rolleston,  Roal'-stun. 
Romilly,  Rom'-il-y. 
Rothschild,  cor.  Roat-sheelt. 
Rouse,  Ruus. 
Ruthven,  Riv-en. 
Saint  Clair,  Sink-ler. 
Saint  John,  Sin'-jin. 
Saint  Leger,  Sil'-in-jer. 
Salisbury,  Sawlz'-ber-y. 
Sandys,  Sand-iz. 
Savile,  Sav'-il. 
Schenck,  Skenk. 
Schurz,  Shuurts. 
Schuyler,  Sk//-ler. 
Sewall,  Suu'-al. 
Seward,  Suu'-ard. 
Seymour,  See-mur. 
Sneyd,  Sneed. 
Somers,  Sum-erz. 
Sothern,  Sudh'-ern. 
Southey,  Sow-dhy. 
Stanhope,  Stan'-6p. 
Strachan,  Strawn. 
Stuyvesant,  St// '-ve-sant.  Am. 


Am. 


Am. 


Tad'ema. 

Taliaferro,  Tul-i-ver.    Am. 
Tallmadge,  Tal'-mij. 
Tighe,  T//, 

Tilghman,  Til'-man.    Am. 
Timberlake,  Tim-lik.     " 
Tirrwhit,  Tir'-it. 
Tollemache,  Tol-mash. 
Trafalgar,  Traf-al-gar'. 
Trenholm,  Tren'-um. 
Troughton,  Trow'-ton. 
Tuomey,  Tuu-my. 
Urquhart,  Urk'-ert. 
Vaughan,  Vawn. 
Vaux,  Vawks. 
Villiers,  Villers. 
Waldegrave,  Wal'-graiv. 
Walmesley,  Wamz-ly. 
Walsingham,  Wal-si-kum. 
Warwick,  War'-ik. 
Wellesley,  Welz'-ly. 
Wemyss,  Weemz. 
Wolesley, 
Woolsey, 

Worcester,  W«s'-ter. 
Wrottesley,  Rots'-ly. 
Wycliffe,  Wik'-lif. 
Wykeham,  Wik'-am. 
Wythe,  With. 
Yonge,  Yung. 


•1  '  • »-~-"-' 
^*  I  W«zl'-zy. 


PHONETIC   SPELLING. 

The  foregoing  examples  will  have  prepared  us  to  appre- 
ciate the  advantages  of  phonetic  writing — that  is,  of  any 
system  in  which  the  relation  between  the  audible  sound  and 
the  visible  symbol  is  always  the  same.  No  doubt  there  have 
been  such  modes  of  writing,  at  least  temporarily,  until  the 
spoken  language  changed.     The  language  of  the  Spanish 


2o6  The  English  Language. 

Academy  is  now  so  far  regular  that  the  reader  is  never  at 
a  loss  except  for  the  place  of  the  accent,  if  left  unmarked. 
So  German  presents  but  little  difficulty,  and  is  now  under- 
going a  pretty  vigorous  pruning  of  redundant  material.  The 
present  English  pronunciation  and  spelling  are  probably 
the  most  discordant  ever  known,  and  many  have  been  the 
efforts  to  harmonize  them.  The  first  attempt  of  which  we 
have  any  knowledge  was  the  Ormulum,  a  metrical  paraphrase 
of  the  Scripture  lessons  of  the  Church,  written  by  a  priest 
named  Ormin,  about  the  year  1200.  His  phonetic  system 
was  limited  to  the  doubling  of  the  consonant  after  a  short 
vowel,  as  we  write  summer  instead  of  sumer  ;  but  to  this  he 
attached  great  importance,  imitating  the  author  of  the 
Apocalypse  in  anxiety  for  the  purity  of  his  text. 

"  &  whase  wilenn  shall  thiss  boo 
Efft  otherr  sithe  writenn, 
Himm  bidde  ice  thatt  het  write  rihht 
Swa  sum  thiss  boo  himm  taechethth, 
All  thwerrt  ut  affterr  thatt  itt  iss 
Uppo  thiss  firrste  bisne  ; 
Withth  all  swillc  rime  alls  herr  iss  sett, 
Withth  all  se  fele  wordess  ; 
&  tatt  he  loke  wel  thatt  he 
An  bocstaff  write  twiggess, 
Eggwhser  thaer  itt  uppo  this  hoc 
Iss  writenn  o  thatt  wise." 

The  object  of  the  principal  reformers  has  been  more 
comprehensive — to  devise  either  a  universal  alphabet  or  a 
universal  language.  Conspicuous  among  them  was  John 
Wilkins,  Bishop  of  Ripon,  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Royal 
Society,  who  in  1668  published  a  small  folio  with  the  title, 
"  An  Essay  towards  a  Real  Character,  and  a  Philosophical 
Language."  The  work  showed  much  ability,  acuteness,  and 
industry,  and  was  thought  by  the  Brothers  Chambers  worth 
republishing  ;  but  no  one  has  thought  it  worthy  of  adoption. 

About  1854  many  "Alphabetic  Conferences"  of  learned 
men  were  held  in  London  under  the  presidency  of  the  Cheva- 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  207 

lier  Bunsen,  the  Prussian  Ambassador,  for  the  purpose  of 
devising  a  system  of  written  characters  capable  of  represent- 
ing all  human  utterances.  It  is  sufficient  here  to  say  that 
these  laudable  efforts  were  unsuccessful.  Prof.  Max  Muller 
then  undertook  a  universal  Missionary  Alphabet,  which  also 
has  not  met  with  general  acceptance.  The  next  in  order 
was  Lepsius'  "  Standard  Alphabet,"  which  was  published 
for  the  second  time  in  London  in  1863,  and  which  has  been 
adopted  in  some  works  for  representing  foreign  names.  In 
1867  Prof.  Alexander  Melville  Bell  published  his  "  Visible 
Speech  or  Universal  Alphabetics,"  the  first  attempt,  so  far 
as  I  am  aware,  to  reduce  the  sounds  and  signs  of  language 
to  a  scientific  system.  The  arrangement,  the  forms,  and 
even  the  names  of  the  characters  are  designed  to  correspond 
with  the  various  positions  of  the  organs  of  speech,  A  letter, 
instead  of  being  called  Alpha  or  A,  may  be  named  "  High- 
Back  Wide  Round."  The  total  number  of  characters,  with 
similar  names,  exhibited  on  page  37  of  the  work,  is  129. 
Wonderful  results  are  said  to  have  been  accomplished  by 
this  system,  in  enabling  adepts  to  reproduce  at  sight  the 
most  strange  and  difficult  kinds  and  combinations  of  sounds  ; 
but  it  seems  to  me  that  most  persons  would  be  utterly  una- 
ble to  learn  it,  that  it  would  be  unwieldy,  and  that  either  the 
printed  or  the  manuscript  character  recommended  would 
present  to  the  eye  a  most  uninviting  page.  Lastly,  there  is 
the  palaeotype  of  Mr.  A.  J.  Ellis,  comprising  267  letters,  and 
36  additional  guides  to  pronunciation,  in  all  303.  It  is  no 
wonder  that  he  was  unable  to  apply  an  apparatus  so  cumber- 
some to  the  very  purpose  for  which  it  seems  more  especially 
to  have  been  invented.  The  inventor  frankly  admits  its 
unfitness  for  general  use.  Mr.  Ellis  is  also  the  author  of  a 
much  simpler  system  which  he  calls  "  Glossic,"  in  which 
none  but  the  letters  in  common  use  are  employed.  It  fails 
to  show  any  nice  distinctions  of  sound.  The  following  is  an 
example : 

"  Glosik  raiting  \z  akweird  in  dhi  proases  ov  glosik  reeding. 
Eni  wun  hoc  kan  reed  glosik  kan  reit  eni  ward  az  wel  az  hee  kan 


2o8  The  English  Language, 

speek  it,  and  dhi  proper  moad  ov  specking  iz  lernt  bei  reeding 
glosik  buoks.  But  oaing  too  its  pikeu'lier  konstruk'shen,  glosik 
speling  iz  imee'dietli  intel'ijibl,  widhou't  a  kee  too  eni  nomik 
reader.  Hens  a  glosik  reiter'kan  komeu'nikait  widh  aul  reederz, 
whedher  glosik  aur  noraik,  and  haz  dhairfoar  noa  need  too  bikum 
a  nomik  reiter.  But  hee  'kan  bikum  'wun,  if  serkemstensez  ren- 
der it  dezei'rabl,  wedh  les  trubl  than  thoaz  hoo  hav  not  lernt 
glosik." 

This  specimen  contains  455  letters  and  11  dots  that  have 
no  perceptible  use — 466  in  all.  In  our  common  spelling 
there  would  be  472  letters.  The  saving  therefore  would  be 
about  3|-  per  cent.,  a  point  of  some  importance,  as  one  of 
the  arguments  insisted  upon  is  the  great  economy  of  time 
from  omitting  the  silent  letters.  And  were  it  not  for  the 
dots  this  would  probably  be  the  simplest  plan  yet  proposed. 
Its  poverty  is  seen  in  the  employment  of  the  same  letter — e 
— for  a,  e,  i,  0,  and  ti  in  ^^  word,''  ^^  render,''  and  ^^circum- 
stances." 

There  are  also  various  schemes,  more  or  less  known  in 
England  and  America,  that  use  the  common  alphabet  as  a 
basis,  and  supplement  its  deficiencies  with  additional  letters. 

In  opposition  to  any  kind  of  spelling  reform,  one  Ameri- 
can critic  has  written  at  considerable  length,  arguing,  rather 
inconsistently,  that  the  present  system  presents  no  difficulty, 
and  that,  even  if  it  did,  it  is  not  desirable  that  it  should  be 
easy.  A  more  weighty  defence  of  our  anomalous  spelling, 
is  that  the  origin  and  history  of  words  are  treasured  in  its 
antiquated  forms.  But  this  argument,  sound  though  it  be, 
has  less  weight  than  might  be  supposed.  In  general,  it  ap- 
plies only  to  words  that  retain  an  Italian  or  a  French  form,  or 
have  come  pretty  directly  from  Greek  or  Latin.  For  nearly 
all  words  of  Teutonic,  Slavic,  Asiatic,  African  or  American 
origin,  the  spelling  is  no  guide ;  for,  in  not  a  few,  like  bride- 
groom, woman  and  hiccough,  it  is  a  blunder,  and  misleading. 
Again,  many  words  have  passed  through  several  languages, 
and  the  spelling  reveals  only  one  stage  in  their  progress. 
What  reader  of  the  morning  papers  sees,  or  cares  to  see, 
that  his  comb  and  pitcher,  his  bottle  an<;i  cards,  his  pantaloons 


Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  209 

and  galoches  are  Greek,  his  lemons  and  gherkins  Persian,  or 
that  the  sugar  that  molHfies  the  rancor  of  his  coffee  has 
come  from  the  far  Sanskrit,  through  Persian,  Arabic,  Span- 
ish, and  French,  and  is  Hke  none  of  its  ancestors?  Etymol- 
ogy is  not  illustrated  by  writing  move,  shove,  drove,  nor  does 
the  spelling  teach  the  common  reader  anything  of  the  history 
of  such  forms  as  taught,  thought,  and  bought.  Nearly  all  that 
etymology  would  lose  by  a  reform  would  be  a  few  silent 
letters  in  words  from  the  Greek.  It  is  only  words  whose 
spelling  is  regular  that  carry  their  etymology  on  their  face. 
Again  the  great  body  of  readers  neither  know  nor  care  any- 
thing about  etymology.  They  are  willing  to  take  their  words 
at  their  present  face  value,  without  questioning  whence  they 
came.  Not  one  in  ten  thousand  of  those  who  think  them- 
selves educated  can  tell  without  a  dictionary  the  derivation  of 
words  not  of  Greek  or  Latin  origin  ;  and  the  relative  number 
of  Greek  and  Latin  scholars  is  becoming  less  every  year. 

But  while  the  desirability  of  phonetic  writing  does  not 
admit  of  a  reasonable  doubt,  there  are  reasons  for  believing 
that  its  attainment  is  not  at  hand.  In  the  first  place,  man- 
kind are  averse  to  radical  changes.  Their  greatest  reforms 
are  at  best,  not  from  bad  to  good,  but  from  bad  to  something 
not  quite  so  bad.  The  new  departures  and  radical  reforms 
so  often  clamored  for,  are  generally  but  a  reversion  to  some 
shallow  expedient  that  has  been  tried  a  hundred  times,  and 
found  wanting.  The  multitude  has  often  been  called  fickle 
and  fond  of  change ;  but  their  mobility  is  on  hinges  and  not 
on  wheels — oscillating  backward  and  forward  between  points 
that  are  near  together.  Were  the  ground  at  once  clear  and 
fertile,  how  pleasant  to  plant,  and  watch  the  growth !  Were 
the  human  mind  a  blank,  how  easy  to  write  upon  it !  But 
we  are  like  the  medieval  monks,  who,  in  order  to  pen  their 
saintly  homilies,  had  to  erase  painfully,  odes  of  TibuUus  and 
hymns  to  the  heathen  gods.  And  the  erasure  was  never 
complete.  With  all  but  mere  children  it  is  not  learning  but 
unlearning  that  is  the  rub.  I  believe  that  no  people  having 
a  religion  embodied  in  sacred  books  ever  accepted  a  new 
one.      Christianity  and  Buddhism  were   both  driven  from 


2IO  The  English  Language. 

their  native  places  to  seek  converts  among  races  of  men  who 
had  no  Bibles,  Vedas,  or  Puranas.  Just  as  little  are  bodies 
of  men  inclined  to  change  their  languages  or  modes  of 
writing  them.  We  have  seen  that  the  Egyptians  kept  up 
their  hieroglyphic  systems  until  the  times  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  although  the  civilized  nations  around  them  had 
been  using  neat  and  convenient  alphabets  for  ages ;  that  the 
ancient  races  of  Mesopotamia  never  abandoned  their  arrow- 
head writing ;  and  that  the  Chinese  still  persist  in  the  use 
of  their  excessively  difficult  character.  There  is  therefore 
an  almost  insuperable  difficulty  in  the  general  conservatism 
of  mankind. 

In  the  second  place,  those  who  have  any  voice  or  influence 
in  the  matter  are  not  generally  conscious  of  suffering  any 
inconvenience,  and  so  have  no  direct  motive  for  change. 
Those  who  can  read  and  write  do  so  with  little  difficulty, 
and  those  who  cannot  may  be  counted  out.  Reading,  in- 
deed, presents  no  difficulty,  except  in  new  and  strange  words 
and  names,  and  is  learned  by  children  without  much  labor. 
As  to  writing,  we  have  seen  that  the  saving  in  time  and  space 
would  probably  not  exceed  three  or  four  per  cent. ;  and  it  is 
by  no  means  certain  that  any  system  would  be  on  the  whole 
easier  than  the  present.  It  might  be  thought  that  phonetic 
writing  would  at  least  save  us  from  the  mortification  of  mis- 
spelling, but  when  we  think  of  Mr.  Ellis'  "  serkemstensez," 
it  is  not  clear  that  even  that  would  be  diminished.  It  may 
be  said  that  each  one  should  spell  as  he  pronounces — that  is, 
express  his  peculiarities  of  utterance  in  his  own  peculiar  way; 
but  that  would  be  the  utter  confusion  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
which  might  be  brought  about  without  any  radical  reform. 
With  so  little  to  attract  them,  every  person  at  all  advanced 
in  years,  all  who  are  busy,  and  all  who  have  much  to  do 
with  books  would  rather  keep  on  as  they  are  than  learn 
anything  very  different.  Besides,  the  world  is  now  full  of 
books,  whose  pages  seem  to  us  fair  and  familiar  and  smiling 
as  the  face  of  a  friend.  The  ability  to  read  them  and  make 
literal  extracts  must  be  kept  up  for  a  hundred  years,  no 
matter  what  system  prevails.     We  cannot  afford  either  to 


Pronunciation  a7id  Spelling.  211 

destroy  or  transform  our  literature ;  and  were  the  transfor- 
mation considerable,  our  favorite  authors  would  be  no  more 
lovely  than  a  mother's  face  in  a  paper  mask.  To  impose  a 
radically  different  spelling  or  pronunciation  upon  the  author- 
ized version  of  the  Scriptures,  would  be  a  more  serious  shock 
to  the  piety  of  those  who  speak  the  English  tongue  than  all 
the  assaults  of  the  unbeliever. 

A  third  consideration  that  has  much  weight  with  me  is, 
that  a  thing  may  be  highly  desirable  and  yet  so  difficult  as 
to  be  impracticable.  Now  to  represent  to  the  eye  all  the 
sounds  of  our  vastly  copious  and  heterogeneous  language 
would  not  be  easy,  even  with  the  zealous  co-operation  of 
everybody.  With  some  languages  it  would  be  easy.  Span- 
ish is  very  regular,  but  its  sounds  are  few  and  simple. 
There  are  Polynesian  tongues  built  up  of  only  about  twenty 
different  syllables,  all  of  the  simplest  kind.  We  have  seen 
that  Japanese  has  but  73  syllables  in  all,  and  Cherokee  85, 
while  English,  counting  names  of  persons  and  places,  con- 
tains more  than  9,000.  Among  them  are  such  syllables 
as  frounced,  glimpsed,  knurled,  smoothed,  sixths,  twelfths, 
shrives,  thoughts,  thwarts.  A  still  greater  difficulty  is  found 
in  the  fleeting,  uncertain  character  of  some  of  the  sounds. 
No  two  persons  ever  agree  throughout  as  to  what  they  are. 
People  differ  in  hearing  and  in  utterance,  and  in  their 
attempts  to  represent  what  they  hear  and  utter.  We  have 
seen  that  Mr.  Ellis,  who  has  doubtless  given  the  subject 
more  attention  than  any  other  person  ever  did,  writes  werd 
for  word,  and  agrees  with  our  American  lexicographers 
in  representing  the  familiar  word  what  as  whot.  To  my  indi- 
vidual judgment  this  is  a  bad  rendering.  The  vowel  is  neither 
the  a  in  hat  nor  the  o  in  hot,  but  something  between  ;  and  of 
the  two  I  should  think  the  former  the  best  approximation. 
The  guesses  at  the  intermediate  sounds  heard  in  such  words 
as  girl  and  pearl  strike  some  on  one  side  and  some  on 
the  other,  and  mislead  by  a  show  of  precision.  No  ap- 
proach to  precision  is  possible  without  adding  considerably 
to  our  alphabet.  It  now  consists  of  26  letters,  but  q  and  x 
add  nothing  to  its  compass,  so  that  it  is  no  better  than  24. 


212  The  English  Language. 

Webster  admits  43  simple  sounds,  to  which  the  diphthongs 
oi  and  ow  might  be  added.  This  would  certainly  not  be  too 
many,  and  yet  would  almost  double  the  present  number. 
He  who  will  invent  19  new  letters  that  shall  harmonize  per- 
fectly in  style  with  those  already  in  use,  and  add  nothing  to 
the  trouble  of  either  reading  or  writing,  will  have  gained  an 
idea  of  one  of  the  difficulties  to  be  overcome. 

The  great  caravan  routes  of  the  East  may  be  traced  across 
the  deserts  by  the  lines  of  bleaching  bones,  and  the  path- 
way of  human  progress  is  strewn  with  the  mortuary  remains 
of  schemes  for  the  sudden  improvement  of  the  lot  of  man. 
Healthy  progress  is  slow  and  noiseless,  as  the  growth  of  the 
forest  and  the  herbage  is  not  by  thunder  and  proclamation. 
"  The  kingdom  of  heaven  cometh  not  with  observation," 
but,  "  as  if  a  man  should  cast  seed  into  the  ground ;  and 
should  sleep  and  rise  night  and  day,  and  the  seed  should 
spring,  and  grow  up,  he  knoweth  not  how."  (Luke  xvii.  20. 
Mark  iv.  26^  The  treasures  of  the  mind  are  gathered  slowly 
atom  by  atom  ;  and  our  26  letters  are  the  imperceptible 
growth  of  5,000  years.  We  might  take  a  lesson  from  the 
Spaniards  and  the  Germans  and  reduce  the  chaos  of  our 
dictionary  by  numerous  reforms,  singly  so  small  as  to  shock 
no  prejudices.  Just  what  these  reforms  should  be  I  am  in 
no  better  position  to  say  than  any  one  else.  I  may,  how- 
ever, suggest  a  few,  merely  to  show  that  some  improvement 
is  possible  without  making  either  reading  or  writing  in  the 
least  degree  more  difficult. 

I.  We  might  omit  all  those  letters  that  in  the  present 
state  of  the  language  have  no  influence  on  the  pronunciation. 
This  would  give,  for  example : 

beuty       for  beauty 


lam 

lamb 

spek 

speck 

giv 

give 

puf 

puff 

agregate 

aggregate 

eg 

egg 

rime 

rhyme 

seze 

seize 

ful          for 

full 

kil 

kiln 

peple       ** 

people 

salmist    " 

psalmist 

diarea     " 

diarrhoea 

demene  " 

demesne 

depo        " 

depot 

buz          " 

buzz 

Pronunciation  and  Spelling.  2 1 3 

A  good  part  of  the  reforms  of  this  character  would  be 
merely  a  return  to  an  earlier  and  simpler  spelling.  It  may 
be  objected  here  that  this  would  sometimes  destroy  the 
distinction  between  words  that  sound  alike  but  are  written 
differently,  as  wright,  write,  right,  and  rite.  The  objection 
is  sound  in  principle,  but  its  force  may  be  considerably 
weakened.  The  above  is  the  best  example  of  the  kind  and 
is  often  adduced,  but  as  the  gh  has  an  influence  on  the  pro- 
nunciation, the  four  words  would  be  reduced  to  two,  not 
to  one ;  and  the  effect  would  be  offset  by  all  pairs  of 
words  now  written  alike  but  pronounced  differently.  Aye, 
yes  and  aye,  ever ;  bass,  in  music  and  bass,  a  fish ;  the  bow 
of  an  archer  and  the  bow  of  a  ship  are  examples.  Moreover, 
as  words  are  addressed  to  the  ear  much  oftener  than  to  the 
eye,  the  present  ambiguity  would  be  but  little  increased. 
The  following  sentence  too  will  show  how  little  danger  there 
is  of  misunderstanding  even  an  extreme  case,  which  is  not 
in  the  least  helped  by  the  present  spelling. 

"I  had  just  tied  my  bay  horse  to  a  bay  tree  and  seated  myself 
in  the  recess  of  the  bay  window,  when  presently  I  heard  the 
hounds  bay  on  the  other  side  of  the  bay,  where  they  had  brought 
a  deer  to  bay." 

2.  We  might  confine  g  to  what  is  commonly  called  its  hard 
sound,  and  write  ■a.jilloi  brandy  instead  of  2.  gill. 

3.  Substitute  f  iox  ph,  as  is  done  in  Italian  and  Spanish  ; 
also  iox  gh  wherever  the  pronunciation  is/". 

4.  Confine  s  to  its  sharp  hissing  sound  and  let  z  represent 
its  value  in  muse. 

5.  Relieve  q  of  all  its  present  duties  and  turn  them  over 
to  k.  Some  other  use  might  be  found  for  this  spare  letter, 
and  it  has  even  been  suggested  that  it  be  put  for  the  n  in 
finger. 

6.  Regulate  the  duties  of  a,  e,  ea,  ee,  ei,  and  ie  so  that  no 
one  of  them  should  conflict  with  another. 

7.  Do  the  same  for  o,  00,  ou,  and  u. 

8.  Gaining  courage  as  we  advance,  we  might  relegate  to  k 
a  part  of  the  work  of  c,  and  to  s  another  part,  so  as  to  let  it 


214 


The  English  La7iguage. 


stand  for  the  English  and  Spanish  ch  in  church,  or  the  Ital- 
ian c  in  cielo. 

g.  Restore  the  two  characters  used  for  th  in  thin  and  ihine 
until  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century. 

10.  Restore  the  long  s  of  the  last  century  with  the  value 
of  sk,  and  let  2  be  differentiated  thus,  size,  azure. 

We  might  still  have  x  left  for  whatever  might  be  needed. 

Some  idea  of  the  results  may  be  gathered  from  the  fol- 
lowing few  examples  ; 


fosforus  for  phosphorus 


jmjer 

ginger 

laf 

"   laugh 

use, 

a  noun 

uze. 

"  verb 

kvvik 

for  quick 

sak 

"    sacque 

cu 

"    chew 

kac 

for  catch 

cure 

"   church 

flem 

"   phlegm 

sizm 

"   schism 

fiud 

"   flood 

muve 

"   move 

duv 

"   dove 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  all  these  changes  could  be 
introduced  at  once  and  made  successful.  Those  that  would 
arouse  the  least  opposition  should  be  tried  first,  until  the 
idea  of  eternal  unchangeableness  be  overcome.  Any  influ- 
ential publication  might  introduce  some  of  the  least  startling 
almost  without  criticism.  The  old  and  new  spellings  might 
subsist  side  by  side  until  one  supplanted  the  other,  as  there 
are  now  hundreds  of  words,  like  gaol  and  jail,  pedlar  and 
peddler ,  jewellery  and  jewelry,  having  two  or  more  spellings. 
To  try  to  carry  through  an  entire  revolution  at  once  would 
ensure  defeat ;  and  it  is  better  to  undertake  little  and  suc- 
ceed, than  to  attempt  much  and  fail.  Professional  politicians 
are  especially  familiar  with  the  strengths  and  weaknesses  of 
masses  of  men,  and  they  are  wiser  in  their  generation  than 
the  children  of  light.  They  suit  their  wares  to  the  market. 
They  never  seriously  undertake  any  reform  wide-reaching 
and  deep,  well  knowing  that  to  do  so  would  arouse  an  oppo- 
sition somewhere  that  would  cover  them  with  defeat  if  not 
with  ridicule. 


PART   SECOND. 


ENGLISH    GRAMMAR. 


ENGLISH   GRAMMAR. 


CHAPTER  I. 
PRELIMINARY. 

Writers  on  English  grammar  have  occupied  themselves 
chiefly  with  two  questions : 

1st.     What  various  forms  does  any  English  word  assume? 

2d.     What  form  is  to  be  used  in  any  given  instance  ? 

The  answer  to  the  first  has  been  commonly  called  Etymol- 
ogy, that  to  the  second  Syntax, 

The  first  application  of  words  was  doubtless  to  material, 
visible,  tangible  things ;  but  from  such  words  men  have  had 
to  select,  as  each  one  best  could,  under  the  influence  of 
fanciful  and  misleading  analogies,  terms  to  express  all  the  con- 
ceptions of  the  mind.  The  selections  have  not  always  been 
happy  ;  and  grammarians  have  been  no  more  successful  than 
others.  Thus  the  sounds  of  speech  have  been  called  hard, 
soft,  broad,  slender,  round,  full,  empty,  thick,  thin,  flat,  fat, 
sticky — words  aptly  descriptive  of  butternuts  and  building 
materials,  but  vocal  sounds  might  as  well  have  been  called 
blue,  alkaline,  or  rhombohedral.  So,  too,  a  class  of  words 
have  been  labelled  as  adjectives — meaning  thrown  to — that  is, 
words  or  things  thrown  to  some  other  words  or  things.  A 
second  important  class  have  been  designated  2&verbs — that  is, 
merely  words.  The  title  of  a  third  class  is  prepositions — 
meaning  placed  before — as  if  all  words  except  the  last  were 
not  placed  before  some  others.    So  etymology  properly  signi- 

217 


2i8  English  Grammar. 

fies  the  science  of  the  derivation  of  words,  and  is  so  employed 
by  a  class  of  scholars,  but  in  the  majority  of  English  Gram- 
mars has  the  peculiar  signification  given  above.  This  point 
may  be  illustrated  by  supposing  an  etymologist  and  a  gram- 
marian to  give  their  respective  views  of  the  word  daughter. 

Etymol. — A  native  word  occurring  in  Middle  English  as  dohier, 
doghter,  daughter,  douhter,  dowter,  of  which  the  plurals  dohtren, 
dehtren,  and  degier  are  found  ;  from  Anglo-Saxon  dohtor,  pi.  ddh- 
ior,  ddhtra,  ddhtru,  and  ddhter ;  Dutch,  dochter ;  Icel.,  ddttir  j 
Swed.,  dotier  ;  Dan.  dotter  and  datter  ;  Goth.,  dauhiar  ;  Old  High 
German,  tohter  j  Mod.  H.  G.,  iochter ;  Rus.,  dock  ;  Greek, 
dvyarrjp  ,•  Sansk.,  duhtri.  Lassen  and  Curtius  suppose  the  ety- 
mology to  be  Sansk.,  duh  or  dhugh,  to  milk — the  milker — and  so 
allied  to  the  English  dug. 

Gram. — A  common  noun,  feminine  gender,  singular  number. 

Syntax  is  primarily  a  military  term,  signifying  the  proper 
arrangement  of  troops,  on  the  march  or  in  the  field.  It  is 
not  inaptly  applied  to  the  marshalling  of  words,  but  should 
include  the  order  in  which  they  are  placed,  a  point  that 
receives  little  attention  in  works  on  English  grammar. 

Grammatical  etymology  and  syntax  might  very  well  have 
been  denoted  by  the  words  analysis  and  synthesis,  that  is, 
separating  or  sorting,  and  putting  together ;  for  they  are 
not  unlike  the  operations  of  the  printer,  who  at  one  time 
picks  to  pieces  a  page  of  types,  putting  each  in  its  proper 
compartment,  and  again  re-collects  and  combines  them  into 
a  story  or  sermon.  But  when  words  are  once  fairly  estab- 
lished in  use  we  are  generally  obliged  to  take  them  as 
they  are,  whether  they  be  admirably  adapted  to  their  pur- 
pose or  not. 

All  this  pre-supposes  that  some  words  admit  of  differences 
of  form,  ^s  eagle,  eagles ;  swift,  swifter,  swiftest ;  come,  came, 
coming,  with  corresponding  differences  of  use.  In  this  re- 
spect languages  differ  greatly,  ranging  from  Chinese,  in  which 
every  word  remains  invariably  the  same,  to  Arabic,  in  which 
a  word  may  assume  some  two  thousand  forms.  English  is 
very  poor  in  grammatical  forms,  so  that  only  a  person  of  the 


Preliminary.  2  rg 

most  acute  analytical  genius  would  ever  think  of  searching 
for  them  and  arranging  them  systematically,  without  previ- 
ously seeing  some  similar  analysis.  But  a  language  that 
should  present  the  following  among  other  forms  might  easily 
suggest  the  idea  of  reducing  them  to  a  system  : 

ama-ba-m  ama-re-m 

ama-ba-s  ama-re-s 

ama-ba-t  ama-re-t 

ama-ba-mus  ama-re-mus 

ama-ba-tis  ama-re-tis 

ama-ba-nt  ama-re-nt 

Interest  would  be  increased  by  finding  another  set  having 
no  resemblance  to  the  former,  as : 


serv-us 

serv-um 

serv-i 

serv-orum 

serv-o 

serv-is 

serv-e 

serv-os 

It  might  easily  be  observed  that  each  of  these  sets  of 
forms,  or  something  like  them,  was  common  to  hundreds 
of  words,  that  the  one  set  was  peculiar  to  words  denoting 
some  kind  of  action,  and  that  the  other  characterized  names 
of  things.  Whenever  so  much  should  be  observed,  the 
grammatical  analysis  of  the  language  would  be  fairly  begun. 
Yet  the  Romans,  who  had  these  very  forms,  seem  never  to 
have  undertaken  such  analysis  until  obliged  to  compare 
them  with  another  system  of  forms  equally  extensive  but 
different  in  every  detail. 

Here  is,  perhaps,  the  fittest  place  for  a  few  general  con- 
siderations, which  should  never  be  lost  sight  of  in  any  study 
relating  to  language. 

A  language  is  not  made  once  for  all  according  to  a  set  of 
pre-existing  rules.  Taken  at  any  particular  time,  it  is  the 
work  of  untold  generations  who  have  made,  unmade,  and 
altered  words  and  phrases,  according  to  their  wants,  con- 
venience, tastes,  and  whims,  provided  always  that  there  was 
a  general  tacit   consent  among  the  speakers.     Some  rude 


2  20  English  Grammar. 

uniformity  would  always  result  from  the  imitative  nature  of 
man  and  his  readiness  to  acquiesce  in  things  as  they  are, 
from  the  common  character  and  circumstances  of  any  people, 
and  the  necessity  for  being  mutually  understood  ;  but  we 
may  as  well  abandon  the  idea  that  any  language  was  ever 
wholly  regular,  systematic,  and  consistent.  On  this  point, 
however,  there  are  great  differences,  the  most  primitive 
tongues  being  apparently  the  most  regular. 

Every  word  or  combination  of  words  must  have  been 
once  used  for  the  first  time,  and  by  a  single  person.  If  no 
one  liked  the  expression,  it  died  there  and  then  ;  if  it  took 
the  popular  fancy,  it  was  like  the  seed  that  fell  upon  good 
ground  and  multiplied  a  hundred-fold.  Thousands  of  such 
words  have  now  gone  round  the  world.  Grave  authors  have 
related,  that  Henry  Dundas,  Viscount  Melville,  used  a  new 
word,  starvation,  in  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons.  It 
seemed  to  those  who  heard  it  so  strange  and  barbarous  that 
they  gave  him  the  nickname  of  Starvation  Dundas,  but  the 
word  has  lived. 

Not  only  do  words  and  phrases  spread  till  they  are  heard 
from  millions  of  mouths,  but  they  spread  to  applications 
and  meanings  not  dreamed  of  by  the  first  introducers.  No 
doubt  each  innovator  sees,  or  fancies,  an  analogy  with  some 
previous  usage,  but  the  ramifications  become  so  numerous 
and  diverse  that  the  point  of  departure  is  often  wholly  lost 
sight  of.  A  perfect  exposition  would  trace  the  expression 
step  by  step  like  the  genealogy  of  a  family.  If  this  can 
seldom  be  done,  it  still  remains  as  the  ideal  to  be  aimed  at. 

Rules  of  speech  are  an  after-thought,  an  attempt  to  arrange 
a  body  of  material  already  existing.  Some  of  this  material 
is  apt  to  defy  all  but  the  most  arbitrary  classification.  If 
one  should  come  into  possession  of  an  old  and  vast  pawn- 
broker's shop  and  depository  of  second-hand  goods,  he 
might  find  it  desirable  to  put  articles  of  the  same  kind 
together.  He  might  find  it  easy  to  separate  watches  and 
firearms,  but  a  piece  of  a  meteorite,  the  urim  and  thummim 
with  which  the  Book  of  Mormon  was  deciphered,  and 
Barnum's  Feejee  mermaid  might  well  give  him  pause.     Or 


Preliminary.  221 

if  one  should  undertake  to  classify  the  occupations  of  a 
great  city,  there  would  be  a  considerable  residuum  to  be 
marked  "  uncertain,"  "  various,"  or  "  all  others."  Precisely 
this  difficulty  confronts  the  grammarian.  He  too  has  his 
irreducible  remainder,  which,  instead  of  labelling  as  above, 
he  usually  calls  "  adjective  pronouns,"  "  conjunctions,"  or 
more  frequently  "  adverbs,"  throwing  together  words  as  dis- 
similar as  t7uice,  where,  very,  yesterday,  yes,  and  atnen.  At 
the  same  time  an  entire  class  of  words  is  generally  made  up 
of  two  monosyllables  of  quite  dissimilar  origin,  but  used 
precisely  like  another  class  of  words,  so  that  they  do  not 
properly  form  a  class  either  by  their  origin  or  their  use. 

There  are  certain  purposes  which  every  language  must 
fulfil  or  fail  entirely.  It  must  be  able  to  name,  or  in  some 
way  distinguish  things.  It  must  have  the  power  to  desig- 
nate their  various  actions — to  tell  whether  they  run,  fly, 
swim,  strike,  bite,  or  scream.  It  is  necessary  to  be  able  to 
show  whether  an  action  is  going  on  now  or  ceased  some 
time  ago.  In  using  such  words  as  man,  bear,  killed,  there 
must  be  some  way  of  indicating  which  of  the  two  killed  the 
other.  There  must  be  some  way  of  denoting  number,  at 
the  very  least  the  difference  between  one  and  many.  Of 
things  that  are  at  all  connected,  a  mode  of  expressing  the  sim- 
pler relations  is  necessary — of  telling,  for  example,  whether 
an  animal  is  in  or  under  or  behind  a  tree.  If  not  indispen- 
sable, it  is  at  least  highly  desirable  to  be  able  to  distinguish 
the  qualities  of  things,  and  say  whether  they  are  big,  little, 
black,  red,  hard,  or  sour.  Lastly,  contrivances  are  needed 
shortening  many  of  the  first  expressions,  or  substituting 
others  like  yes  and  no  that  have  the  brevity  of  algebraic 
symbols.  Now,  although  this  is  substantially  the  work  to 
be  done  by  every  language,  their  ways  of  doing  it  are  in- 
finitely varied  in  detail.  The  variety  is  so  great  that  there 
can  scarcely  be  said  to  be  any  natural  system  from  which 
the  others  are  deviations.  There  is  nothing  more  natural 
than  that  two  words  closely  connected  in  their  application 
should  be  placed  together.  If  one  has  to  speak  of  a  black 
horsey  a  number  of    other  words  ought  not   to   intervene 


222  English   Grammar'. 

between  black  and  horse ;  yet  this  obvious  requirement  is 
habitually  disregarded.  I  have  even  met  with  instances 
where  two  parts  of  the  same  word  were  separated  by  the 
distance  of  half  a  page  ;  and  if  a  principle  so  self-evident 
in  its  propriety  is  neglected,  we  need  not  expect  any  other 
to  be  faithfully  followed.  As  every  one  has  an  equal  right 
to  invent  and  alter  words  and  their  uses,  so  long  as  imitators 
can  be  found,  and  all  work  without  concert,  and  generally 
with  little  knowledge,  the  result  is  a  large  amount  of  irregu- 
larity and  confusion  ;  and  the  irregularities  of  any  one 
people  are  quite  unlike  those  of  their  neighbors.  It  follows 
that  there  cannot  be  a  science  of  grammar  of  universal 
application.  All  that  is  possible  is  an  exhibition  of  the 
usages  of  some  one  language,  or  of  a  few  compared  together. 

If  every  word  had  one  invariable  form,  grammiar  would  be 
limited  to  the  order  of  the  words,  and  we  should  be  spared 
a  great  deal  of  labor.  That  is  nearly,  but  not  quite,  the 
condition  of  the  English.  Yet,  however  full  and  elaborate 
the  forms  of  any  language  may  be,  they  would  be  easy  to 
handle  if  they  were  complete,  regular,  and  consistent.  It  is 
the  irregularities  and  deficiencies  that  make  the  trouble  and 
make  the  grammars.  There  are  professions  that  thrive  on 
the  errors  of  mankind.  The  priest  lives  by  our  sins,  the 
doctor  by  our  vices,  and  the  lawyer  by  our  quarrels.  So  the 
grammarian  is  maintained  by  the  absurdities  of  our  speech. 
When  we  speak  of  several  things,  we  generally  add  s  to  the 
name  of  one — boys,  horses,  houses,  trees,  birds.  Nothing 
could  be  simpler.  Yet,  although  that  expedient  will  serve 
for  by  far  the  greater  number  of  the  names  met  with  in  our 
literature,  the  small  remainder  form  their  plurals  in  more 
than  sixty  different  ways,  besides  those  that  do  not  dis- 
tinguish the  plural  from  the  singular  in  any  way.  He  who 
will  faithfully  try  to  unravel  these  and  similar  complications 
will  not  be  likely  to  say  that  English  is  a  grammarless 
language. 

If  the  principal  part  of  grammar  has  relation  to  the  various 
forms  that  words  may  assume,  it  is  first  necessary  to  learn 
what  those  forms  are.     But  as  the  variations  are  not  the 


Preliminary.  223 

same  for  all  words,  and  some  have  none — such  as  now,  and, 
before^  yonder, — all  the  words  in  a  language  are  divided  into 
classes  on  the  basis  of  these  grammatical  distinctions.  The 
words  of  these  several  classes  are  frequently  called  PARTS 
OF  SPEECH.  Between  these,  speaking  roughly,  there  will 
generally  be  found  not  only  differences  of  form,  but  also 
differences  in  the  kind  of  meaning  conveyed.  As  to  the 
number  and  character  of  these  classes,  or  parts  of  speech, 
authorities  are  far  from  being  agreed.  I  here  abbreviate  a 
passage  from  Tooke's  "  Diversions  of  Purley,"  the  most  acute, 
though  not  the  most  accurate,  work  on  the  subject. 

"  H.  I  thought  I  had  laid  down  in  the  beginning  the  principles 
upon  which  we  were  to  proceed  in  our  inquiry  into  the  manner 
of  signification  of  words. 

"  B.     Which  do  you  mean  ? 

"  H.  The  same  which  Mr.  Locke  employs  in  his  inquiry  into 
the  Force  of  words  :  viz.  The  two  great  purposes  of  speech. 

"  B.     And  to  what  distribution  do  they  lead  you  ? 

"ZT.  I.  To  words  necessary  for  the  communication  of  our 
Thoughts.  And  2.  To  Abbreviations  employed  for  the  sake  of 
despatch. 

"  B.  And  how  many  do  you  reckon  of  each  ?  And  what  are 
they?    *     *     * 

"ZT.  In  English,  and  in  all  Languages,  there  are  only  two 
sorts  of  words  which  are  necessary  for  the  communication  of  our 
thoughts. 

"^.     And  they  are? 

"ZT.     I.  Noun,  and  2,  Verb. 

**-5.     These  are  the  common  names.     ^'Sv*     * 

"ZT.  *  *  *  And  I  use  them  according  to  their  common 
acceptation. 

"  B.  But  you  have  not  all  this  while  informed  me  how  many 
parts  of  speech  you  intend  to  lay  down. 

"ZT.  That  shall  be  as  you  please.  Either  Two,  or  Twenty, 
or  more." 

These  parts  of  speech  have  been  variously  estimated  from 
three  to  ten,  but  the  greater  number  of  grammarians  have 
reckoned  either  eight  or  nine,  while  differing  considerably 


224  English  Grammar. 

as  to  the  elements  that  make  up  either  number.  I  propose 
to  treat  of  seven — namely,  Noun,  Adjective,  Pronoun,  Verb, 
Adverb,  Preposition,  and  Conjunction.  It  has  been  very  com- 
mon to  make  a  class  of  the  two  little  words  the  and  an 
(abbreviated  into  a),  but  I  shall  include  them  in  the  sub- 
division called  adjective  pronouns.  Still  more  frequently 
have  oh,  ah,  umph,  pshaw,  and  the  like  been  marshalled 
among  the  parts  of  speech.  If  it  be  too  severe  a  judgment 
to  say  that  they  are  no  better  than  the  cries  of  animals, 
expressive  of  feeling  and  not  of  thought — the  mere  raw 
material  from  which  words  might  be  made, — still  they  are  at 
their  best  independent  of  all  rules  and  principles  of  gram- 
mar, and  need  not  be  investigated.  Yet,  if  any  one  chooses 
to  erect  these  two  little  groups,  or  a  dozen  others,  into 
separate  classes,  he  has  a  perfect  right  to  do  so. 


CHAPTER  II. 

NOUNS. 

A  NOUN  is  merely  a  name,  and  might  as  well  have  been 
called  so.  The  word  is  Old  French,  introduced  in  the  four- 
teenth century,  when  all  learning  was  supposed  to  be  either 
French  or  Latin.  The  first  names  must  have  been  those  of 
things  that  could  be  seen,  felt,  or  otherwise  perceived  by  the 
senses,  as  the  ground,  trees,  beasts,  rivers,  the  sun  and  moon. 
But  gradually  names  were  given  to  a  vast  number  of  merely 
imaginary  entities — spirits  of  the  air,  the  earth,  and  the 
waters, — to  the  relations  of  things,  and  conceptions  of  the 
mind.  For  the  human  mind  has  a  strange  and  marked  ten- 
dency to  treat  its  creations  as  real  things,  and  express  by 
names  such  abstractions  as  whiteness,  difference,  proximity, 
futurity,  age,  freedom,  forget  fulness.  The  question  has  some- 
times been  raised  :  Of  what  kind  were  the  first  words  ever 
used  ?  There  is  a  tendency  among  philologists  to  answer  in 
favor  of  verbs — words  expressive  of  action, — for  the  reason 
that  in  Hebrew  or  Arabic  and  in  Sanskrit  most  words  can  be 
traced  to  simple  forms  termed  roots,  the  most  direct  out- 
growth of  which  is  verbs.  But  it  should  be  remembered 
that  those  languages  are  already,  in  their  oldest  monuments, 
highly  developed,  and  not  perceptibly  nearer  the  beginnings 
of  things  than  we  are.  It  is  among  very  rude  and  primitive 
tribes  that  we  should  be  most  likely  to  find  the  earliest  forms 
of  language  and  the  arts,  and  they  are  quite  apt  to  use  the 
same  words  as  nouns,  verbs,  or  anything  else.  Professor 
Whitney  says  that  the  great  Malayo-Polynesian  family  of 
languages  have  scarcely  any  grammatical  distinctions,  and 
nothing  that  can  properly  be  called  a  verb  ;  that  their  so-called 
15  225 


226  English  Grammar. 

verbs  are  only  a  special  use  of  their  nouns.'  If  this  broad 
fact  were  clearly  established  it  would  be  much  more  conclu- 
sive in  favor  of  nouns  than  Shemitic  and  Arj'an  philology 
can  be  in  favor  of  verbs.  It  is  said  that  the  language  of 
Ancient  Egypt,  as  recovered  from  the  monuments,  was  with- 
out distinction  into  parts  of  speech,  and  the  same  is  to  some 
extent  true  of  English.  Very  many  English  words  are 
used  indifferently  as  two  parts  of  speech  ;  and  not  a  few  are 
alternately  nouns,  adjectives,  or  verbs,  as  cahn,  light,  slight y 
level,  plane,  square,  salt.  Now  if  one  were  to  see  snow  for 
the  first  time,  and  coin  a  word  to  represent  roughly  the  gen- 
eral phenomenon,  what  would  probably  be  the  principal 
element  in  his  complex  conception — the  substance,  coldness, 
whiteness,  or  the  act  of  falling  ?  There  is  one  thing  that, 
being  a  daily  necessity  of  organic  life,  must  have  been  famil- 
iar to  the  first  speaking  men  ;  and  yet  it  presents  to  the 
senses  neither  color,  taste,  nor  smell,  and  usually  little  sound 
or  movement.  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  that  our  early 
ancestors  had  no  name  for  water  until  they  adopted  one 
from  some  previous  abstract  word  expressive  of  action.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  many  other  things.  Again,  to  name 
any  object  from  a  characteristic  property  or  action  implies 
comparison  of  several  things  possessing  that  characteristic, 
generalizing  them  and  abstracting  that  special  feature.  Sup- 
pose a  naturalist  of  the  Stone  age  to  observe  a  conspicuous 
action  in  ten  different  animals,  for  none  of  which  he  had  yet 
any  name.  Let  us  suppose  too  that  his  first  step  is  to  invent 
a  verb  to  denote  this  action,  and  from  this  verb  he  forms  a 
noun  or  name.  If  he  then  applies  this  name  to  the  whole 
ten — perhaps  mammals,  birds,  and  insects — they  would  be 
to  him  but  a  single  species,  with  a  single  name.  But  it  is 
well  known  that  the  language  and  habits  of  primitive  peo- 
ples are  the  very  reverse  ;  they  abound  in  particular  names 
and  trivial  distinctions,  but  are  wanting  in  general  terms. 
The  Delawares  had  ten  names  for  various  ages  and  stages  of 
bearhood,  but  none  for  a  bear  in  general.  Or  if  our  old 
naturalist  should  confine  his  carefully  elaborated  name  to 

'  "  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,"  p.  338. 


Nouns,  227 

one  animal,  what  was  he  to  do  with  the  other  nine  ?  Are 
we  to  suppose  him  guilty  of  the  labor  of  studying  ten  ani- 
mals to  find  a  name  for  one  ?  I  conclude  rather  that  the 
earliest  uses  of  speech  must  have  been  to  distinguish  one 
thing  from  another,  as  the  first  linguistic  exercise  of  Adam 
is  represented  to  have  been  in  giving  "  names  to  all  cattle, 
and  to  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  to  every  beast  of  the  field." 

Nouns  have  been  divided  into  classes  on  several  different 
principles,  quite  independent  of  each  other.  They  need  not 
all  be  enumerated.  One  division  is  into  concrete  and  abstract 
nouns.  The  former  relate  to  what  are  regarded  as  substan- 
tial entities,  the  latter  to  their  properties  and  relations,  or  to 
mental  conceptions.  Man,  ox,  sparrow,  stone,  house,  water, 
air,  gas,  comet  are  concrete  nouns  ;  joy,  fever,  solemnity,  sin- 
gularity, whiteness,  solidity  are  abstract.  Concrete  things 
might  often  remain  if  many  of  the  abstract  conceptions  were 
not,  but  the  abstract  can  seldom  be  without  the  concrete. 
When  a  man  suffers  pain  and  disappointm.ent,  he  would  not 
perish  by  their  removal,  but  they  would  certainly  cease  on 
his  death.  This  possibility  of  separate  existence  is  in  gen- 
eral the  distinction.  A  fiddle  and  cornet  may  exist  quite 
independent  of  each  other,  and  without  emitting  any  sounds ; 
and,  indeed,  we  cannot  but  suppose  that  they  might  remain 
entire  if  all  the  rest  of  the  universe  were  annihilated.  But 
let  two  players  sound  them,  the  sounds  would  be  abstract, 
the  concrete  things  being  the  players,  the  instruments,  and 
the  conducting  air.  The  harmony  or  discord  of  the  notes 
would  be  an  abstraction  of  the  second  degree.  A  great 
amount  of  confused  and  inaccurate  thought  and  speech  would 
be  avoided  by  habitually  bearing  in  mind  this  distinction. 

Nouns  are  divided  into  common  and  proper,  the  term 
proper  being  used  in  its  original  sense  of  pertaining  to  some 
one  in  particular.  A  common  name  applies  alike  to  a  whole 
species  or  class,  a  proper  name  to  an  individual.  Man  is  a 
term  for  millions,  Rurel  Vantarel  distinguishes  a  single  per- 
son. Proper  names  are  not  confined  to  human  beings,  but 
extended  to  domesticated  animals,  countries,  towns,  lakes, 
rivers,  mountains,  ships,  books,  periodicals,  stars  and  groups 


228  English  Grammar. 

of  stars,  and  in  former  ages  to  swords  and  battle-axes. 
When  the  same  name  has  been  given  to  several  who  are 
spoken  of  collectively,  it  is  treated  as  a  common  noun,  as 
when  we  speak  of  the  CcBsars,  the  Ptolemies,  the  four  Georges, 
the  four  Maries,  the  two  Carolinas. 

Collective  nouns  include  a  number  of  individuals  under  one 
designation,  treating  them  sometimes  as  one,  at  other  times 
as  many.  Examples  are  mankind,  the  army,  the  regiment, 
the  meeting,  the  moh,  the  convention,  society. 

Nouns  have  four  attributes  which  are  exclusively  the  sub- 
ject of  grammar,  and  they  are  GENDER,  NUMBER,  CASE,  and 
PERSON. 

GENDER. 

Gender  is  based  on  the  distinction  of  male  and  female,  but 
does  not  always  adhere  to  it,  in  some  languages  spreading 
out  in  the  most  capricious  manner.  But  let  us  see  what  the 
distinction  means.     We  might  say  in  Latin  : 

Ille  equus  albus  Yonder  white  horse 

Ilia  equa  alba  Yonder  white  mare 

Observe  that  in  English  the  names  of  the  animals  in  the  two 
sentences  are  entirely  different,  the  other  words  precisely 
alike.  In  Latin  all  the  corresponding  words  are  identical, 
but  their  endings  are  changed.  And  if  one  should  continue 
to  speak  of  the  two  animals  in  Latin,  a  large  part  of  the 
words  directly  relating  to  them  would  differ  in  the  same 
manner.  Now  it  is  this  modification  of  the  associated  words 
that  constitutes  the  distinction  of  gender.  Mere  difference 
of  names  would  not  do  it.  If  it  went  no  farther  than  the 
names,  boy  and  girl  would  be  no  more  a  grammatical  distinc- 
tion than  boy  and  man.  We  have  seen  that  in  English  the 
gender  does  not  change  the  descriptive  words.  What  then 
does  it  amount  to  ?  Answer :  We  have  a  few  words  yet 
that  bind  us  to  the  observance  of  this  distinction.  If  two 
little  words  and  their  variant  forms — five  monosyllables  in 
all — she,  her,  hers,  it,  its — were  dropped,  gender  would  be 
thereby  wiped  from  the  language. 


Nouns.  229 

Most  of  the  languages  spoken  in  the  world  are  without  this 
distinction  of  gender.  It  is  limited  to  the  two  leading  fami- 
lies— the  Aryan  and  Shemitic — and  a  few  African  tongues 
allied  to  the  latter ;  and  Professor  Lepsius  regarded  it  as  a 
marked  evidence  of  mental  superiority.  To  distinguish  by 
special  names  the  sexes  of  the  larger  animals  is  natural 
enough,  but  how  the  distinction  came  to  be  forced  upon 
other  words  not  names  is  difficult  to  discover.  We  can  see, 
however,  that  an  additional  vowel  sound  was  often  added  to 
female  names,  and  in  some  way  became  attached  to  other 
words  used  in  speaking  of  them.  Moreover,  words  expres- 
sive of  qualities  were  very  generally  regarded  as  names ;  and 
some  grammarians  to  this  day  call  such  words  nouns.  They 
divide  nouns  into  nouns  substantive  and  nouns  adjective. 
The  former  are  looked  on  as  representing  substantial  enti- 
ties, the  latter  as  something  added  or  thrown  in  ;  and  the 
elaborately  inflected  languages,  from  Arabic  and  Sanskrit 
down,  give  nouns  and  adjectives  the  same  endings.  But 
when  animals  had  been  divided  into  males  and  females, 
what  was  to  be  done  with  the  rocks  and  clouds,  trees  and 
bushes  ?  Why,  they  were  divided  also,  for,  along  with  a 
tendency  to  treat  mental  conceptions  as  things^  primitive 
men  had  the  strange  habit  of  regarding  inanimate  things  as 
having  life,  feeling,  and  intelligence.  Some  were  called 
male  or  female  from  some  real  or  fancied  characteristic,  and 
some  because  the  endings  of  their  names  resembled  those  of 
the  one  or  the  other  class. 

At  this  point  the  case  rested  with  the  Shemitic  peoples, 
but  the  Aryans  went  a  step  farther.  They  divided  their 
male  names  into  two  portions,  and  set  aside  a  part  as  neither 
male  nor  female.  They  thus  had  three  genders,  now  for 
several  ages  known  as  masculine,  feminine,  and  neuter.  The 
idea  was  excellent,  but  not  carried  out  in  a  way  to  be  of 
any  benefit,  for  the  female  names  seem  to  have  been  left  un- 
divided, and  the  others  so  imperfectly  distributed  as  to  leave 
still  a  large  number  of  inanimate  things  masculine,  while  in 
some  languages  many  male  and  female  beings  are  made 
neuter.     In  the  grammar  of  our  Saxon  fathers  a  woman  was 


230  English  Grammar. 

masculine,  and  our  German  brethren  call  a  stick  and  a  stone 
masculine,  a  body  of  horsemen  feminine,  and  a  horse,  a 
woman,  and  a  girl  neuter. 

Other  races  of  men,  though  they  have  words  distinctive  of 
age,  sex,  and  condition,  do  not  make  them  the  ground  of 
similar  differences  in  other  words. 

Some  of  the  American  Indians  have  systems  in  some 
degree  analogous,  but  much  more  extensive.  Prof.  J.  W. 
Powell  says  that  in  Indian  tongues  genders  are  usually  and 
primarily  classifications  into  animate  and  inanimate.  The 
animate  may  be  again  divided  into  male  and  female ;  but 
this  is  rarely  done.  Objects  are  classified  according  to  their 
attributes,  or  supposed  constitution.  Thus  there  are  ani- 
mate and  inanimate,  of  which  one  or  both  may  be  divided 
into  the  standing,  the  sitting,  and  the  lying,  or  into  the 
watery,  the  mushy,  the  earthy,  the  stony,  the  woody,  and 
the  fleshy.  All  this  may  be  expressed  by  pronouns,  often 
compound,  incorporated  into  the  body  of  the  verb.  Some- 
times these  pronouns  are  separated  into  their  elements  and 
distributed  in  different  parts  of  the  verb.  "A  Ponca  Indian, 
in  saying  that  a  man  killed  a  rabbit,  would  have  to  say  the 
man,  he,  one,  animate,  standing,  in  the  nominative  case, 
purposely,  killed,  by  shooting  an  arrow,  the  rabbit,  he,  the 
one,  animate,  sitting,  objective  case." 

The  distinction  of  gender,  as  originally  established  by  the 
ancestors  of  the  Aryan  races,  has  not  remained  everywhere 
unchanged.  The  Persians  have  abandoned  it  altogether,  the 
languages  of  Southern  Europe  have  dropped  the  third  or 
neuter  gender,  and  the  English  have  discarded  it  from  all 
words  used  as  adjectives,  retaining  it  only  in  the  singular  of 
the  personal  pronoun  of  the  third  person.  In  Danish  and 
Swedish  the  masculine  and  feminine  have  been  merged  in 
one,  in  contradistinction  to  the  neuter,  making  thus  an  ani- 
mate and  an  inanimate  gender ;  but  the  division  of  words 
does  not  always  coincide  with  the  distinction  of  things,  and, 
as  in  English,  the  personal  pronouns  bear  witness  to  a  for- 
mer threefold  division.  With  us  the  interrogative  and  rela- 
tive pronouns  make  a  still  different  discrimination :  who  is 
used  for  rational  beings  and  which  for  all  else. 


Nouns,  231 

English  stands  entirely  alone  in  making  gender  a  rational 
and  intelligible  distinction.  Males  are  masculine ;  females, 
feminine ;  and  inanimate  things,  neuter.  Most  birds  and 
small  animals,  including  the  very  young  of  all  species,  even 
the  human,  are  generally  treated  as  neuter,  the  sex  either 
not  being  known  or  not  thought  worth  distinguishing. 
Sometimes  however  a  gender  is  arbitrarily  assigned. 

"Go  to  the  ant,  thou  sluggard,  consider  her  ways  and  be 
wise." — Prov.  vi.,  6. 

"  Doth  the  hawk  fly  by  thy  wisdom,  and  stretch  her  wings 
toward  the  south  ? " — Job  xxxix.,  26.' 

At  other  times  even  the  most  considerable  animals  are 
spoken  of  as  if  they  were  sexless. 

"  The  hare  sleeps  with  its  eyes  open," — Barbauld. 

"  The  leopard  in  its  chace  of  prey  spares  neither  man  nor 
beast."— Blair's  "  Rhetoric." 

"  It  is  the  war-horse  that  carries  grandeur  in  its  idea." — Id. 

"  If  a  man  shall  steal  an  ox  or  a  sheep,  and  kill  /"/  or  sell  //,  he 
shall  restore,"  etc. — Exod.  xxii.,  i. 

Here,  as  in  many  other  cases,  we  experience  the  want  of 
another  pronoun  that,  like  /  and  thou,  would  have  no  refer- 
ence to  gender. 

By  a  kind  of  make-believe  we  speak  of  the  sun  as  mascu- 
line, the  moon  and  ships  as  feminine.  Sometimes,  but  very 
rarely,  except  in  scientific  discussions,  we  treat  them  as 
neuter.  The  reason  of  the  following  instance  is  quite 
obvious : 

"  When  Cleopatra  fled,  Antony  pursued  her  in  a  five-oared 
galley  ;  and  coming  alongside  of  her  ship,  entered  //  without 
being  seen  by  her." — Goldsmith's  "  Rome." 

^  Quotations  from  Scripture,  unless  otherwise  indicated,  will  be  from  the 
common  authorized  version.  It  will  be  often  cited  for  the  twofold  reason  that 
it  is,  or  ought  to  be,  familiarly  known,  and  that  in  point  of  language  it  is  the 
most  important  and  generally  admired  of  English  classics.  Shakespeare  was  ig- 
norant, careless,  and  inconsistent,  but  the  translators  of  the  Bible  were  scholars, 
who  did  their  work  with  scrupulous  care.  The  spelling  of  the  later  editions  has 
been  modernized,  and  when  it  is  deemed  necessary  to  give  the  exact  version  of 
the  translators  it  will  be  cited  as  King  James's  Bible. 


232  English  Grammar, 

By  a  still  further  exercise  of  fancy  the  earth,  countries, 
cities,  the  Church,  religion,  the  virtues,  and  some  other 
idealized  conceptions  are  spoken  of  as  if  feminine. 

A  considerable  number  of  words  necessarily  relate  to  male 
or  female  beings,  but  do  not  show  which.  Such  are  friend^ 
neighboTy  cousin,  servant,  tenant,  informant,  artist,  teacher, 
elephant,  bear,  eagle,  elk.  It  sometimes  becomes  necessary  to 
employ  a  pronoun,  when  a  gender,  if  unknown,  has  to  be  as- 
sumed for  the  nonce,  or  we  must  use  the  awkward  expression, 
"  he  or  she,"  or  "  he,  she,  or  they,"  which  so  often  increases 
the  tedious  wordiness  of  statute  law.  In  all  such  cases  we 
experience  the  want  of  a  pronoun  of  the  common  gender — 
that  is,  including  both  masculine  and  feminine. 

Names  of  males  and  females  of  the  same  species  are  dis- 
tinguished in  several  different  ways. 

1.  Quite  distinct  words  are  used,  as  : 

brother        sister  husband       wife 

hart  roe  ram  ewe 

In  the  present  composite  state  of  the  language  the  two 
words  may  be  of  quite  diverse  origins,  as  earl  and  countess, 
bachelor  and  maid.  Many  terms  are  restricted  to  one  or  the 
other  sex,  as  clown,  judge,  knave,  knight,  satyr,  squire,  trib- 
une, amazon,  dowager,  viilliner,  virago,  witch. 

2.  Feminines  were  anciently  made  by  adding  the  termina- 
tion -ster,  which  continued  till  the  end  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  when  it  began  to  give  place  to  the  Norman-French 
-ess.  Not  one  of  these  early  feminines  now  remains  with 
its  mediaeval  signification.  Spinster  may  still  be  met  with, 
but  only  as  a  legal  designation  of  an  unmarried  woman, 
or  in  burlesque,  and  not  as  meaning  a  woman  who  spins. 
Songster  is  no  longer  understood  as  feminine,  but  requires 
for  that  purpose  a  second  termination,  making  songster-ess — 
shortened  songstress.  So  seamster  is  made  into  the  double 
feminine  seamstress.  Huckster  and  tapster  have  long  ceased 
to  be  thought  feminine  ;  deemster,  even  as  a  masculine,  is 
confined  to  the  Isle  of  Man ;  and  Baxter  and  Webster,  in- 
stead of  denoting  a  female  baker  and  weaver,  figure  merely 


Nouns. 


233 


as  family  names.  When  the  meaning  of  the  termination 
ster  had  been  forgotten,  and  it  was  only  remembered  as 
marking  the  doer  of  something,  a  number  of  imitations 
sprang  up,  such  as  huckster,  roadster,  rhymester,  teamster,  and 
finally  a  derogatory  sense  was  attached  to  such  words, — dab- 
ster, gamester,  punster,  trickster,  whipster. 

3.  In  the  oldest  English  -en  was  a  common  feminine 
termination,  masculine  fox,  feminine  fixen  ;  in  the  modern 
form,  vixen  is  the  sole  survivor  in  English.  Carlin,  feminine 
of  carl,  may  be  found  in  Scotch. 

"  There  were  five  carlins  in  the  South 
That  fell  upon  a  scheme, 
To  sen'  a  lad  to  Lunnon  toun, 
To  bring  them  tidings  hame." 

Burns. 

Allied  to  this  form  are  two  or  three  feminines  in  -ine,  from 
the  German  -inn — landgravine,  margravine. 

4.  Masculines  in  -tor,  taken  directly  from  Latin,  form 
feminines  by  dropping  out  the  0,  and  adding  -ix. 


administrator 

executor 

testator 


administratrix 

executrix 

testatrix 


5.  Far  the  greatest  number  of  feminines  are  made  by 
adding  to  the  masculine  -ess,  from  the  French  -esse  and  -ice 
— Latin  -issa  and  -ix.  If  the  word  can  be  easily  pronounced 
with  this  termination,  it  usually  undergoes  no  change,  as 
lion,  lioness ;  otherwise  it  is  shortened  or  modified  in  some 
one  of  a  number  of  ways. 


abbot 

abbess 

dauphin 

dauphiness 

actor 

actress 

deacon 

deaconess 

adulterer 

adultress 

duke 

duchess 

arbiter 

arbitress 

elector 

electress 

benefactor 

benefactress 

emperor 

empress 

caterer 

cateress 

founder 

foundress 

chanter 

chantress 

giant 

giantess 

conductor 

conductress 

governor 

governess 

234 


English  Grammar. 


heir 

heiress 

negro 

negress 

hunter 

huntress 

master 

mistress 

host 

hostess 

tiger 

tigress 

instructor 

instructress 

tyrant 

tyranness 

Jew 

Jewess 

votary 

votress 

marquis 

marchioness 

Duke  and  duchess  were  much  more  alike  in  their  French 
forms,  due  and  duc-esse.  Master  and  mistress  were  maister 
and  maisteress.  Marquis  and  marchioness  are  both  from  Low 
Latin  marchio,  a  prefect  of  the  marches,  or  borders,  but  they 
have  undergone  different  degrees  of  modification.  As  usual, 
what  appears  the  most  irregular  is  the  least  changed.  So 
tyranness  is  from  an  older  form  of  the  word  than  tyrant.  If 
we  had  occasion  now  to  form  a  feminine  noun  from  a  mascu- 
line, we  should  do  it  by  adding  -ess.  All  other  modes  are 
either  obsolete  or  still  foreign — too  old  or  too  new. 

Hero  and  heroine  are  from  the  Greek,  and  as  independent 
of  landgrave  and  layidgravine  as  two  languages  of  the  same 
general  family  can  be. 

A  few  words  from  the  south  of  Europe  take  feminines  in 
a — signor,  signora  ;  sultan,  sultana. 

Czarina  seems  to  be  a  Polish  formation ;  the  Russian  is 
Tsaritsa. 

Widower  from  widow  is  entirely  anomalous. 

Lastly,  sex  is  distinguished  by  adding  some  descriptive 
noun  or  pronoun. 


man-servant 

male  child 

ram-lamb 

cock-sparrow 

peacock 

he-goat 

bridegroom 

tom-cat 


maid-servant 

female  child 

ewe-lamb 

hen-sparrow 

peahen 

she-goat 


The  Elizabethan  writers  employed  many  more  of  these 
feminine  forms  than  we  deem  necessary.  Such  were  cham- 
pioness,  butler  ess,  vassaless,  waggoness,  warriouress.     It  may 


Nouns.  235 

well  be  doubted  if  there  are  not  still  too  many.  In  a  multi- 
tude of  instances  it  is  not  necessary  to  distinguish  whether 
the  relation  referred  to  is  held  by  a  man  or  a  woman. 

NUMBER. 

A  noun  may  represent  one  thing,  or  several,  and  generally, 
but  not  always,  shows  which  is  intended.  If  I  say  :  "  Cook 
the  shad  for  dinner,"  it  is  left  uncertain  how  many  I  want. 
A  noun  signifying  one  thing  is  said  to  be  singular,  or  in  the 
singular  number  ;  if  more  than  one,  it  is  called  plural.  The 
distinction  might  have  been  carried  farther.  Several  old 
languages,  among  which  were  Arabic,  Hebrew,  Sanskrit, 
Greek,  and  Gothic,  had  forms  for  two,  called  the  dual 
number.  But  it  seems  to  have  been  everywhere  either  a 
new  form  never  fully  established  or  else,  what  is  more  likely, 
an  old  one  dying  out  by  the  time  we  see  it.  Its  forms  are 
nowhere  so  fully  developed  as  those  of  the  plural,  which  in 
turn  is  generally  more  scanty  than  the  singular.  Hebrew 
has  little  more  than  a  trace  of  the  dual,  which  is  confined  to 
things  that  belong  in  pairs,  such  as  eyeSy  ears,  hands,  tongs. 
Ancient  Greek  carried  the  distinction  into  all  classes  of  in- 
flected words,  but  gave  the  option  of  using  the  plural  in  all 
cases,  while  modern  Greek  drops  the  dual  altogether:  The 
Gothic  of  the  fourth  century  had  but  scanty  remains  of  the 
dual,  and  when  we  next  get  sight  of  the  Teutonic  languages 
it  is  found  only  in  the  personal  pronouns  of  the  first  and 
second  persons — forms  for  we  two  and  you  two — in  Old  High 
German,  Saxon,  and  Norse.  From  two  of  these  even  that 
scanty  remnant  has  disappeared,  and  is  now  to  be  found  only 
in  Iceland. 

Some  Polynesian  languages  are  said  to  have  separate 
forms  for  a  number  three. 

Some  words  are  always  singular  because  they  express 
ideas  that  scarcely  admit  of  duplication.  Such  are  anni- 
hilation, chaos,  eternity,  omniscience ;  also  some  arts  and 
sciences,  as  eloquence,  oratory,  poetry,  astronomy,  pharmacy, 
dialling.     Names  of  substances,  or  kinds  of  material,  con- 


236  English  Grammar. 

sidered  merely  as  such,  are  mostly  singular,  as  gold,  silver, 
zinc,  granite,  tar,  asphalt,  gypsum,  hemp,  flax,  wool.  Of  many 
of  these  the  plural  is  sometimes  used  for  articles  made  of 
such  material,  or  different  varieties  or  specimens — irons,  tins, 
brasses,  marbles, parchments,  slates.  But  when  a  substance  is 
rare  and  not  yet  made  into  familiar  articles  bearing  its  name, 
it  remains  singular,  as  atropia,  phosphorus,  lanthanum,  zeolite. 

On  the  other  hand  some  nouns  are  always  plural  in  form. 
A  considerable  class,  denoting  arts,  sciences,  and  pursuits, 
end  in  -ics — acoustics,  hermeneutics,  mathematics,  optics,  poli- 
tics, physics.  These  were  primarily  Greek  adjectives:  thus, 
physics  meant  physical  facts  or  principles ;  hydraulics,  prin- 
ciples and  devices  relating  to  water-pipes.  Of  this  class, 
arithmetic,  logic,  and  rhetoric  have  remained  singular.  A  few 
nouns  are  plural  as  denoting  things  composed  of  pairs  of 
similar  parts,  as  trowsers,  breeches,  scissors,  pincers,  tongs. 
Finally  there  are  nouns  that  are  used  only,  or  almost 
exclusively  in  the  plural  form  for  no  obvious  reason — 
ashes,  gallows,  news,  lees,  shorts  (a  kind  of  meal),  dregs, 
molasses,  suds,  some  of  which  may  be  more  particularly 
referred  to  hereafter. 

Some  words  are  the  same  in  the  singular  and  plural — 
sheep,  swine,  deer,  fish,  and  the  names  of  several  species  of 
deer  and  fish — a  shoal  of  mackerel,  a  dozen  perch,  a  herd  of 
fallow  deer,  of  red  deer,  or  elk. 

By  far  the  greatest  number  of  English  nouns  form  their 
plurals  by  adding  s  to  the  singular ;  and  now  for  several  cen- 
turies none  have  been  formed  in  any  other  way  ;  yet  we  have 
introduced  from  abroad  a  great  variety  having  the  forms 
prescribed  by  the  several  languages  from  which  they  are 
taken.  The  Anglo-Saxon  had  several  plural  endings — as,  n, 
or  an,  a,  0,  and  u.  After  the  Norman  Conquest  these  became 
reduced  first  to  es,  en,  and  e,  next  to  es  and  en,  and  finally  to 
es  or  s.  The  termination  es  continued  for  a  long  time  to 
form  a  separate  syllable,  as  has  been  shown  at  page  147. 

"  The  knight-«  all  in  their  arm-<?j  went." 

Hawes'  "  Pastime  of  Pleasure,"  1554. 


Nouns.  237 

Occasional  instances  are  found  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
seventeenth  century. 

"  Can  by  their  pains  and  ach-es  find 
All  turns  and  changes  of  the  wind." 

Butler's  "  Hudibras." 

At  present  if  a  noun  ends  with  a  sibilant  sound,  that  is  j, 
sh,  z,  zh,  an  e  is  interposed  between  the  final  consonant  and 
the  s  of  the  plural,  to  make  the  word  pronounceable  : 

circus  circus-es  morass  morass-es  fox         fox-es 

dish      dish-es  bench    bench-es  chintz    chintz-es 

When  the  singular  ends  with  a  silent  e,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  put  in  another  : 

lease      lease-s  piece        piece-s  breeze    breeze-s 

bridge   bridge-s  crevasse   crevasse-s 

A  few  native  words  ending  in  the  sound  of  /"  change  it  to 
V  in  the  plural.  They  are  calf,  half,  staff,  wharf  elf,  self 
shelf  leaf,  sheaf  thief  knife,  life,  wife,  loaf,  wolf.  An  e 
always  intervenes  between  the  v  and  the  s  of  the  plural,  not 
for  sake  of  pronunciation,  but  from  the  habit  of  the  language 
not  to  write  a  v  without  a  vowel  after  it.  We  sometimes 
meet  with  hooves,  prooves,  dwarves,  turves,  etc.,  but  they  are 
not  reckoned  good  English  now.  In  earlier  stages  of  the  lan- 
guage words  like  the  above  were  written  with  /"throughout, 
but  the /"was  pronounced  like  v.  The  singular  has  retained 
the  old  spelling,  the  plural  the  pronunciation.  In  dove, 
glove,  grave,  helve,  love,  nave,  reeve,  stave,  wave,  the  original 
spelling  of  the  singular  has  been  overcome. 

The  plural  of  staff,  when  it  means  a  set  of  executive 
officers,  is  staffs. 

Wharfs  may  sometimes  be  met  with,  but  rarely  in  America. 

Beef  is  French  from  Latin,  and  means  originally  a  bull, 
ox,  or  cow : 

"A  herd  of  beeves^  fair  oxen  and  fair  kine." 

Milton. 


238  English  Grammar, 

In  this  sense  it  is  seldom  used.  Its  plural  is  beeves,  in  imita- 
tion of  Middle  English.  Different  qualities  or  varieties  of 
the  flesh  of  cattle  would  undoubtedly  be  called  beefs. 

Nouns  that  end  in  the  single  vowel  ^  have  their  plurals  in 
-ies — berries f  daisies^  lilies.  If  the  y  be  preceded  by  another 
vowel,  the  mere  addition  of  s  is  sufficient — days,  journeys, 
boys,  guys.  U  after  ^  is  a  consonant,  the  two  being  equal  to 
kw — hence  colloquies,  obsequies.  The  termination  -ies  is  con- 
formable to  the  original  form  of  the  singular,  which  is  in 
most  instances  from  a  French  ending  -ie.  This  form  of  the 
singular,  once  very  common,  continued  to  be  used  occa- 
sionally down  to  the  time  of  Milton. 

"  Now  storming  furie  rose, 
And  clamour  such  as  heard  in  heaven  till  now 
Was  never." — "  Paradise  Lost." 

Some  nouns  ending  in  0  add  es,  and  others  only  s,  and  the 
distinction  is  far  from  uniform.  The  principle  or  habit 
roughly  followed  seems  to  be  to  add  es  to  words  that  have 
been  long  and  familiarly  used  in  the  language,  and  s  to  those 
that  are  comparatively  new  and  strange,  and  especially  to 
words  imported  from  Italian  and  Spanish  ;  thus  the  plural 
of  the  familiar  word  negro  is  negroes,  but  that  of  the  recent 
word  negrito  is  negritos. 

Bilboes,  calicoes,  cargoes,  echoes,  gambadoes,  grottoes,  heroes, 
potatoes,  torpedoes,  tyroes,  vetoes,  volcanoes. 

Albinos,  bambinos,  cameos,  cantos,  drongos,  embryos,  folios, 
halos,  hidalgos,  intaglios, pianos, po7tgos, pueblos,  ridottos,  salvos, 
solos,  sombreros,  studios. 

Although  no  really  English  word  ends  with  i,  yet  several 
of  quite  foreign  origin  are  met  with  in  English  books.  Of 
these,  alkali  has  become  so  fully  naturalized  as  to  have  a 
recognized  plural,  alkalies.  Rabbi  is  in  a  transition  state, 
and  just  at  this  time  admits  of  rabbles  and  rabbis.  The 
following  rare  words  add  only  s :  agouti,  ai,  coati,  maki, 
maori,  moholi,  mufti,  peri,  sai,  saki,  sofi,  vari. 

A  very  few  foreign  words  ending  in  u  also  form  plurals  in 
s — emu,  gnu,  mitu,  quipu. 


Nouns.  23^ 

Particles  are  sometimes  treated  for  the  moment  as  nouns, 
and  then  they  admit  of  plurals  formed  on  the  general 
principles.  We  read  of  the  ''^ pros  and  cons  "  of  a  question, 
and  the  counting  of  the  ^^ ayes  and  noes"  in  which  the 
uncertainty  recurs  as  to  the  plurals  of  words  ending  in  o. 
The  letters  of  the  alphabet  are  designated  in  several  ways, 
one  of  which  is  to  spell  their  names.  That,  however,  is 
applicable  to  only  a  few,  whereas  they  may  all  be  conven- 
iently called  so  many  ^'s,  3's,  ^*s,  ;jr's. 

Vestiges  still  remain  of  the  old  Saxon  plural  in  an  or  en^ 
of  which  the  most  familiarly  known  is  oxen,  the  only  one 
that  has  retained  its  original  place  unchanged  in  universal 
usage,  the  only  change  in  a  thousand  years  being  from  an  to 
en.  Brethren  and  children  are  not  so  well  preserved.  The 
Anglo-Saxon  plural  of  brother  was  like  the  singular,  brot/tor, 
but  brothers  taken  collectively,  even  if  not  more  than  two 
in  number,  were  usually  designated  by  a  collective  term, 
gebrothru,  like  the  modern  High  German  Gebriider. 

"  And  dhd  dha  tyn  leorning-cnihtas  gebulgon  widh  dha  twegen 
gebrodhru." — Matt,  xx.,  24. 

The  A.-S.  dative  case  singular  for  brother  was  brether  ;  and 
in  the  long  period  of  confusion  between  Avritten  Saxon 
and  written  English,  the  several  forms  and  significations 
seem  to  have  become  intermixed.  The  final  outcome  was 
brothers  for  the  children  of  the  same  natural  parents,  and 
brethren  for  persons  bound  together  by  some  solemn  or 
mystic  obligation.  Of  the  two,  brethren  is  the  oldest,  and 
occurs  in  the  "  Chronicle  of  Robert  of  Gloucester,"  in  the 
form  bretheren,  toward  the  close  of  the  thirteenth  century. 
Its  age  is  no  doubt  the  reason  why  it  is  employed  exclusively 
in  the  Bible. 

In  Anglo-Saxon  child  and  children  were  alike  cild : — 

"  and  he  [Herod]  d  sende  dhi  and  of  sloh  ealle  dha  cild  dhe  in 
Bethleem  waeron." — Matt,  ii.,  16. 

In  the  period  of  transition  a  plural  childer  was  developed, 
which  Robert  de  Brunne  wrote  childir  in  the  beginning  of 


240  English  Grammar. 

the  fourteenth  century.  This  plural  has  lingered  in 
localities  till  the  present  day,  and  is  often  heard  from  natives 
of  Ireland.  By  the  end  of  the  century  en  had  been  added, 
making  a  double  plural,  already  shortened  into  children.  In 
the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  there  were  the  simi- 
lar double  plurals  calvern,  lanibern,  eyren.  Doughtren  and 
sistren  were  as  common  as  brethren,  and  perhaps  the  latter 
of  the  two  may  still  be  heard  in  devotional  meetings  among 
the  long-leaved  pines  fanned  by  the  soft  winds  of  the  South. 

Chickens  and  kittens  are  not  double  plurals.  The  en  is  a 
diminutive,  and  not  a  plural  termination — a  little  cock, 
a  little  cat. 

Hose  and  pease  are  primarily  singular,  of  which  the  old 
plurals  were  hosen  and  peasen. 

"  Then  these  men  were  bound  in  their  coats,  their  hosen,  and 
their  hats,  and  their  other  garments,  and  were  cast  into  the  midst 
of  the  burning  fiery  furnace." — Daniel  iii.,  12. 

"  Next  twenty  yeomen,  two  and  two. 
In  hosen  black  and  jerkins  blue." 

Scott's  "  Marmion,"  canto  i. 

"  All  men  might  well  dispraise 
My  wit  and  enterprise. 
If  I  esteemed  a  pease 
Above  a  pearl  of  price." 

Lord  Surrey,  1540. 

"  Tickle  treasure,  abhorred  of  reason, 

Dangerous  to  deal  with,  vain,  of  none  avail, 
Costly  in  keeping,  past  not  worth  X\yo peason. 
Slipper  in  sliding,  as  an  eeles  tail." — Id. 

It  is  the  singulars  of  nouns  that  are  used  as  adjectives, 
hence  pease  is  singular  in  the  following  examples  : 

"  Hacket  and  Coppinger,  as  the  story  tells,  got  into  3ipease-cart 
and  harangued  the  people." — Dryden's  "  Religio  Laici." 

"  Pease-porridge  hot,  pease-porridge  cold, 
Pease-porridge  in  the  pot,  and  nine  days  old." 


Nouns.  241 

The  s  in  the  word  pease  is  not  plural  but  inherent,  it  being 
from  the  Latin  pisum.  When  the  plural  termination  en  had 
almost  entirely  disappeared,  it  began  to  be  thought  that 
pease  was  the  same  in  both  numbers,  and  next  that  it  was 
exclusively  plural,  of  which  the  singular  must  be  pea  ;  and 
now  for  all  practical  purposes  we  have/^«  dcndpeas  or  pease, 
the  last  of  which  is  fast  disappearing.  At  the  present 
moment  kose  is  the  same  in  both  numbers,  but  is  not  certain 
to  remain  so.  A  few  years  ago,  when  I  was  one  day  look- 
ing for  stockings,  the  gentlemanly  vender  held  up  an  elegant 
specimen  and  declared  it  to  be  a  very  fine  hoe. 

Grilse  and  grouse  are  like  hose. 

A  class  of  words,  originally  adjectives,  but  used  indiffer- 
ently as  adjectives  or  nouns,  are  in  the  same  situation, 
Siamese,  Japanese,  Portuguese.  Milton,  who  was  familiar 
with  the  singulars  hose  and  pease,  wrote 

"  The  barren  plains 
Of  Sericana,  where  Chineses  drive 
With  sails  and  wind  their  cany  waggons  light." 

"  Paradise  Lost,"  iii.,  437. 

On  the  other  hand  Americans,  long  familiar  with  the  black- 
eyed  pea,  and  now  learning  to  wear  a  "hoe"  on  each 
"  limb,"  have  made  the  world  acquainted  with  the  "  Heathen 
Chinee." 

Cherry  is  a  product  similar  to  pea.  The  final  s  of  cherries, 
or  cherris — the  Old  French  cerise,  Latin  cerasus — was  mis- 
taken for  a  sign  of  plurality,  and  the  singular  assumed  to  be 
cherri.  Cheesen  and  housen  may  still  be  heard  in  some 
districts  of  England. 

The  Scotch  een  and  shoon — Chaucer's  eyen  and  Shake- 
speare's shooen — are  relics  of  the  termination  en.  Jack  Cade 
charges  his  followers  : 

"  We  will  not  leave  one  Lord,  one  Gentleman  ; 
Spare  none  but  such  as  go  in  clouted  shooen." 

2  "Henry  VI.,"  4,2,  178. 


242  English  Grammar, 

At  first  sight  the  proportion  seems  correct ; 

swine  :  sow  : :   kyne  :  cow, 

but  it  is  only  plausible.  Swine  is  a  modern  form  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  swin,  which  was  the  same  in  the  singular  and 
plural,  while  sow — A.-S.  su — was  a  different  word,  as  Schwein 
and  Sau  are  in  modern  German.  The  singular  of  cow  was  cH, 
the  plural  ky,  well  preserved  in  the  Scotch  kye. 

"  When  new  ca'd  kye  rout  at  the  stake, 
And  pownies  reek  in  sheuch  an'  brake." — Burns. 

In  kine  an  unnecessary  n  is  added,  as  if  to  make  kyen.  It 
is  therefore  a  double  plural,  while  swine  is  not  a  plural  at  all. 

We  have  just  seen  that  the  plural  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  cil 
was  ky,  and  of  this  once  common  method  of  forming  the 
plural,  by  merely  changing  a  vowel,  several  familiar  ex- 
amples still  survive.     They  are : 


foot 

feet 

man 

men 

goose 

geese 

louse 

lice 

tooth 

teeth 

mouse 

mice 

The  last  two  have  suffered  under  French  influence,  having 
been  originally  Ms,  pi.  Ijfs ;  miis,  pi.  m^s,  precisely  as  in  the 
case  of  cH,  ky.  It  is  readily  seen  that  the  difference  between 
the  singular  and  the  plural  was  at  first  the  same  in  each 
instance.  The  ample  sound  of  the  singular  was  reduced  to 
what  we  may  call  a  thin  or  slender  one  in  the  plural.  It 
remains  to  discover  the  principle  that  governed  this  modifi- 
cation. It  can  scarcely  be  gathered  from  the  Anglo-Saxon, 
which,  like  the  present  English,  shows  in  these  words  only 
a  change  of  vowel. 

f6t  fit  mann  menn 

g6s         gls  liis  lys 

t6tS         tits  mils  mys 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  in  all  the  Aryan  languages 
the  plural  was  once  generally  made  by  the  addition  of  as, 
which  in  course  of  time  coalesced  in  various  ways  with  the 
preceding  elements,  became  altered,  or  even  completely  lost. 


Nouns.  243 

In  Latin  we  become  accustomed  early  to  the  fact  that  when 
a  word  gains  in  length  it  often  loses  in  breadth,  and  that  the 
addition  of  a  syllable  in  many  instances  has  the  effect  of 
rendering  the  vowel  of  the  original  more  slender.  It  is 
observed,  too,  that  in  some  languages  the  vowels  of  succes- 
sive syllables  are  required  to  harmonize  according  to  some 
peculiar  classifications  of  sounds,  and  if  they  do  not  this 
originally  the  one  is  changed  to  suit  the  other.  This  is 
especially  the  case  in  the  Magyar.  In  the  remains  of  the 
Gothic  we  find  masculine  and  feminine  nouns  lengthened  in 
the  plural,  and  ending  in  s,  the  main  part  of  the  word  re- 
maining unchanged.     In  this  it  is  followed  by  the  Dutch  : 

voet,  a  foot  voet-en,  feet 

tand,     tooth  tand-en,  teeth 

In  the  Norse,  the  most  outlying  of  the  Low  German  part  of 
the  family,  the  terminal  s  becomes  r — a  phenomenon  called 
rhotacism — and  in  the  words  under  consideration  the  vowel 
of  the  root  is  changed,  as  in  Saxon  and  English,  without 
any  further  addition  than  doubling  a  final  s.  Yet  this  lan- 
guage affords  abundant  examples  of  the  modification  of  a 
vowel  by  a  syllable  following  as  bdc,  book ;  back-r,  books.  A 
followed  by  a  syllable  containing  u  was  changed  to  o  of 
which  the  declension  of  hjarta,  the  heart,  will  be  a  sufficient 
example : 


PLURAL 

SINGULAR 

NOM. 

hjort-u 

All  cases  hjarta 

Gen. 

hjart-na 

Dat. 

hjort-ura 

Ace. 

hj6rt-u 

A  clearer  light  is  yielded  by  the  Old  High  German,  in  which 
occur  such  forms  as : 


kalp 

calf 

kelb-ir 

calves 

hals 

neck 

hels-ir 

necks 

pale 

skin 

pelk-i 

skins 

anst 

a  favor 

enst-i 

favors 

This  is  well  maintained  by  the  Modern  High  German: 


244  English  Grammar. 

Fuss        Fiiss-e  Mann        Mann-er  <   ; 

Gans       Gans-e  Laus          Laus-e  ,   -  c; 

Zahn       Zahn-e  Maus         Maus-e 

Indeed  we  have  examples  in  still  living  English: 

brother       brethren  cat        kitten 

child  children  cock    chicken 

There  is  no  doubt  then  that  such  forms  as  feet  and  teetA  are 
due  to  the  influence  of  terminal  syllables  that  had  dis- 
appeared before  the  era  of  Saxon  literature. 

A  considerable  number  of  nouns,  adopted  from  Hebrew, 
Greek,  Latin,  French,  and  Italian,  retain  the  plurals  of  the 
original  tongues,  while  there  is  yet  a  constant  tendency  to 
assimilate  them  to  English  forms.  Hence  a  considerable 
number  of  them  are  used  either  with  the  original  or  an  Eng- 
lish plural,  according  to  individual  taste,  the  only  principle 
approximately  followed  being  that  the  English  ending  s  is 
apt  to  be  given  to  words  that  have  been  long  and  familiarly 
used,  while  those  that  may  still  be  considered  the  property 
of  the  learned  more  frequently  retain  a  foreign  dress.  The 
Greek  and  Latin  words  that  find  their  way  into  our  literature 
are  very  numerous,  and  present  examples  of  most  of  the 
plural  forms  of  those  languages.  It  would  require  a  con- 
siderable volume  in  itself  to  exhibit  all  such  Greek  and 
Latin  nouns  ;  the  object  here  is  merely  to  present  examples 
that  will  give  the  English  reader  some  idea  how  he  comes  to 
meet  with  so  many  strange  ways  of  forming  the  plural.  He 
will  observe  that  the  body  of  the  plural  often  appears  to  be 
lengthened  in  some  way,  but  that  is  because  an  original  ele- 
ment has  been  crowded  out  of  the  singular.  Most  of  the 
Greek  words  have  suffered  from  the  assumption — often  quite 
groundless — that  they  have  reached  us  through  a  Latin 
medium.  Many  of  them  too  take  forms,  either  in  the 
singular,  in  the  plural,  or  both,  that  are  neither  Latin  nor 
Greek,  but  may  be  regarded  as  English.  Thus  we  may 
have  the  Greek  forms  orchis,  orchides,  or  the  English  fonns 
orchid,  orchids.  It  is  well  to  preserve  this  distinction,  and 
not  get  such  pairs  of  words  mismatched.      Wherever  the 


Nouns, 


245 


singular  is  formed  at  variance  with  Greek  or  Latin  usage,  I 
think  it  should  be  treated  as  English.  Unfortunately  the 
form  of  the  singular  is  sometimes  such  that  it  might  belong 
to  either  of  two  languages.  Still  worse  there  are  many- 
words  rarely  or  never  used  in  both  numbers,  and  if  we 
attempt  to  supply  the  missing  one  according  to  analogy,  we 
may  find  ourselves  at  variance  with  some  one  who  has 
adopted  a  different  form.  The  whole  subject  is  in  a  very 
confused  and  unsettled  state,  and  lexicographers  would  ren- 
der a  valuable  service  by  determining,  as  far  as  possible,  the 
plurals  of  doubtful  nouns,  instead  of  giving  only  those  that 
are  already  well  known.  I  shall  divide  these  nouns  into 
three  classes  :  (i)  Latin  ;  (2)  Greek  ;  (3)  Greek  Latinized  or 
Anglicized.  The  letter  s  after  a  plural  will  indicate  that  it  is 
also  formed  by  adding  that  letter.  This  addition  of  j  is  a 
practice  on  the  increase,  and  is  objectionable  chiefly  when  a 
word  already  contains  a  repetition  of  that  sound.  Censuses^ 
susurruses,  synizesises  contain  altogether  too  much  sibilation. 


Latin  Nouns. 

1st.  Singular  -a,  plural  -(B  : 

alga 

algse                             facula 

faculae 

antenna 

antennae                       formula 

formulae,  s 

catena 

catenae                         nebula 

nebulae 

corona 

coronae                         vertebra 

vertebrae 

2d.  Singular 

-us,  -er^  -ir,  plural  -i  : 

alumnus 

alumni                  puer 

pueri 

cactus, 

cacti,  s                 liber 

libri 

calculus 

calculi                  centumvir 

centumviri,  s 

focus 

foci,  s                   decemvir 

decemviri,  s 

radius 

radii                      triumvir 

triumviri,  s 

3d.  Singular  and  plural  -us — mostly  from  verbs : 

afflatus  crepitus  hiatus  singultus      ' 

apparatus,  s  excursus  ictus  sinus,  s 

census,  s  fetus,  s  inflatus  .  nof 

conatus  ^adus  meatus,  s  '    "^ 


246  English  Grammar. 

4th.  Singular  -us,  plural  -era : 


genus 


onus 


opus 


"vnscus 


5th.  Lepus,  lepores. 
6th.  Corpus,  corpora. 
7th.  Crus,  crura. 
8th.  Grus,  grues. 
9th.  Incus,  incudes. 

loth.  Singular  -um^  plural  -a — often  originally  adjectives 
or  participles : 


amentum 

datum 

medium,  s 

addendum 

emporium,  s 

menstruum,  s 

candelabrum             flagellum 

ovum 

cilium 

frustum 

spectrum 

erratum 

infusorium 

speculum 

cranium 

labium 

stratum,  s 

nth.  Singular 

and  plural  alike,  -es  : 

colluvies 

lues                  sanies 

sordes 

congeries 

manes              series 

species 

facies 

ingluvies         soboles 

superficies 

1 2th.  Singular 

-es,  plural  -ifes  : 

antistes 

antistites                 tennes 

5          termites 

13th.  Singular 

-tes,  plural  -teUs  : 

aries            i 

arietes                       paries 

parietes 

14th.  Singular  stapes,  plural,  stapedes. 
15th.  Singular  -is,  plural  -es : 


avis 

classis 

naris 

piscis 

axis 

amanuensis 

natis 

unguis 

canis 

fascis 

oasis 

vectis 

caulis 

ignis 

orbis 

vermis 

1 6th.  Singular  lapis,  plural  lapides, 
1 7th.  Glis,  glires ;  vis,  vires. 
1 8th.  Lis,  lites  ;  quiris,  quirites. 
19th.  Anas,  anates ;  penas,  penates. 


Nouns. 


H7 


20th.  Singular  -o,  plural  -tnes  : 

albugo        albugines 

caligo 

caligines 

imago         imagines 
virgo          virgines 

virago 
testudo 

viragines 
testudines 

2 1  St.  Singular  -o,  plural  -ones: 

comedo             septentrio 

turio 

vibrio 

22d.  Gustos,  custodes. 
23d.  Os,  t^e  mouth,  pi.  era. 
24th.  Os,  «  ^i^w^,  pi.  ossa. 
25th.  Singular  -x,  plural  -ces  : 

Apex,  appendix,  s,  aruspex,  calx,  carex,  cicatrix,  codex,  cortex, 
crux,  directrix,  falx,  faux,  frutex,  helix,  matrix,  nux,  radix, 
rectrix,  varix,  vertex,  vortex,  s. 

26th.  Singular  -x,  plural  -ges :    rex,  interrex,  remex,  the 
plural  of  which  last  is  remiges. 
27th.  Sors,  sortes. 
28th.  Singular  -men,  plural  -mina  : 

Cognomen,  culmen,  dictamen,  foramen,  gravamen,  legumen, 
prsenomen,  putamen,  tegmen,  tormen. 

29th.  Add  -es  to  the  singular — anser,  lar,  passer,  ren. 

30th.  Venter,  ventres  ;  accipiter,  accipitres. 

31st.  Singular  -r,  or  -re,  plural  -ria,  mostly  adjectives,  of 
which  the  En'glish  in  -ar  and  Latin  in  -aria  are  the  most 
common — talaria. 

32d.  Singular  in  -/  or  -le,  plural  Ha,  like  the  preceding : 

Bacchinalia,  crealia,  lupercalia,  memorabilia,  marginalia,  quin- 
quinalia,  regalia,  saturnalia,  semipedalia. 

33d.  Singular  -ne,  plural  -nia,  like  the  foregoing  insigne, 
insignia. 

34th.  Singular,  -or,  plural  -ores,  and  therefore  like  29th,  but 
in  English  books  chiefly  used  in  the  plural,  classifying  birds 
and  insects  according  to  their  habits. 

fossores,  diggers  grallatores,  waders 

insessores,  roosters  scansores,  climbers 


248 


English  Grammar, 


35th.  Femur,  femora. 
36th.  Glans,  glandes  ;  f rons,  frondes. 
37th.  Frons,  frontes ;    quadrans,  quadrantes ;  vagans,  va- 
gantes. 

38th.  Ruminans,  ruminantia. 
39th.  Caput,  capita. 
40th.  Hyems,  hyemes. 

Greek  Nouns  that  Retain  the  Greek  Forms. 


1st.  Singular  -ma,  plural  -mata  : 

aroma  enchondroma  plasma 

asthma  exanthema  programma 

atheroma  glaucoma  regma 

bema  gyroma  rhizoma 

blastema  lemma,  s  sarcoma 

carcinoma  magma,  s  steatoma 

dogma,  s  melasma  zeugma 

drama,  s  miasma,  s  zygoma 

enema,  s  neuroma 

enigma,  s  pedioma 

A  considerable  number  are  so  far  Anglicized  as  sometimes 
to  drop  the  a  of  the  singular,  as  miasm  for  miasma,  and  a 
still  greater  number,  like  aneurism,  paradigm,  problem,  use 
the  shorter  form  exclusively. 

2d.  Singular  -on,  plural  -a  : 

aphelion  epiploon 

(apocryphon)  etymon,  s 

ganglion,  s 

liriodendron,  s 

lithobiblion 

lithodendron,  s 

noumenon 


automaton,  s 
criterion,  s 
entozoon 
eozoon 
epizoon 

3d.  Singular  -on,  plural  -ones  : 

antichthon  autochthon 


parahpomenon 

parhelion 

phenomenon,  s 

phytozoon 

prolegomenon 

propylon 

rhododendron,  s 


telamon 


4th.  Singular  -as,  plural  -ades  : 

dipsas      dryas      (hyas)  hyades     monas      (pleias)  pleiades. 


Nouns. 


M9 


glottis 

proboscis 

hesperis 

parotis 

lepis 

pyramis 

nereis 

raphis 

orchis 

5th.  Singular  -as,  plural  -anUs  : 

atlas,  s  anabas 

6th.  Singular  -ts,  plural  zdes  : 

amaryllis  cantharis 

(anteris)  caryatis 

aphis  chrysalis 

apsis  ephemeris 

oscaris  epinyctis 

7th.    Herpes,  herpetes ;   magnes,  magnetes ;   litotes,  lito- 
tetes. 

8th.   Cacoethes,  cacoethea. 
9th.  Singular  -os,  plural  -ea  : 

epos  (epea)      bathos  (bathea) 

lOth.  Singular  -os,  plural  -otes: 
Rhinoceros     rhinocerotes,  s 

I  ith.   Singular  -jys,  plural  -j/es  : 
Erinys,  didelphys,  helamys,  lagomys,  pterichthys. 

1 2th.  Singular  -s,  plural  -thes  : 
Dinornis,  enthelmins,  epiornis,  ichthyornis,  megalornis. 

1 3th.  Singular  -s,  plural  -es  : 
Cyclops,  elops,  myops,  nyctalops,  ops,  seps,  thrips.  . 

14th.  Singular  -x,  plural  -ces  : 
Climax,  donax,  dropax,  hyrax,  labrax,  narthex,  pinax,  spadix. 

15th.  Singular  -x,  plural  ges  : 
Apterix,  archaeopterix,  coccyx,  larynx,  meninx,  pharynx,  salpinx. 


meros      pathos  (pathea). 


megaceros     monoceros. 


Greek  Nouns,  Latinized  or  Anglicized. 


The  greater  number  of  Greek  nouns  have  become  so 
thoroughly  at  home  in  the  language  that  we  seldom  think 
of  their  being  Greek.  Apology,  baptism,  creosote,  dynasty^ 
euphony,  hydrogen,  iodine,  lexicon,  myth,  nomad,  octagon, 
panic,  skeleton,  telescope,  are  examples.     To  any  of  this  large 


259 


English  Grammar. 


class  that  admit  of  plurality,  we  merely  add  s  in  the  same 
manner  as  if  they  were  native  words. 

A  considerable  number  take  a  Latin  form  in  the  plural. 
Some  of  these  have  a  form  in  the  singular,  identical  with  a 
Latin  termination  ;  some  change  the  termination  of  the  sin- 
gular to  conform  to  the  Latin;  and  others  have  a  Greek 
ending  in  the  singular  and  Latin  plurals.  Thus  -os  and  -ous 
are  changed  to  -us  in  the  singular,  and,  so  far  as  I  am  aware, 
have  their  plurals  in  -i.  On  becomes  um,  with  plural  in  a  ; 
ai  becomes  ce ;  and  eis,  es.  This  Latinizing  and  Anglicizing 
has  been  carried  out  in  a  very  haphazard  way.  This  is  well 
shown  by  the  names  compounded  with  odons,  a  tooth,  or 
pons,  a  foot,  for  which  the  following  are  various  substitutes. 


anodon 

mylodon 

bradypus 

melampode 

chsetodon 

pleurodont 

gasteropod 

platypod 

diphyodont 

prionodon 

heteropod 

platypus 

gyrodus 

pycnodont 

hexapod 

polypus 

labyrinthodont 

rhizodont 

lagopus 

rhizopod 

machairodus 

toxodon 

macropod 

mastodon 

antipode 

macropus 

megalodon 

apode 

megalapode 

Most  of  these  words  are  scarcely  to  be  found  in  the  plural. 
Polypus  is  a  word  in  common  use  with  the  Latin  and  English 
plurals  polypi  and  polypuses.  The  most  consistent  course 
would  be  to  give  the  plural  in  i  to  all  that  end  in  us,  and 
treat  the  others  as  English.  In  that  case  our  kindred  on 
the  other  side  of  the  globe  would  have  only  three  syllables. 

1st.  Singular  -a,  plural  -cs, — not  numerous  : 

cotyla,  or  cotyle  glama 

epiphora  lyssa 

exedra  ozena 

exorhiza  paronychia 

2d.  Singular  -e,  plural  -cb — the  greater  part  of  these  either 
do  not  admit  of  plurals  or  take  -s  : 

Anagoge,  apocope,  apotome,  diacope,  diastole,  epitrope,  glene, 
hyperbole,  metope,  paraselene,  parembole,  pericope,  perone, 
ploce,  raphe,  systole. 


parusia 
synalepha 
trachea 
trichina 


Nouns,  251 

3d.  Singular  -es,  plural  -cb  : 

Cerastes,  ascetes,  Hermes,  kolpodes,  mycetes,  sorites,  thera- 
peutes,  troglodytes. 

4th.  Singular  -is,  plural  -es — a  very  numerous  class : 

Acropolis,  anaesthesis,  analysis,  antithesis,  aphairesis,  apodosis, 
crisis,  diagnosis,  emphasis,  enarthrosis,  epanadiplosis,  epiphysis, 
exegesis,  hypostasis,  hypothesis,  mantis,  metamorphosis,  metemp- 
sychosis, phasis,  prognosis,  prytanis,  symphasis,  synthesis. 

Hebrew  Nouns. 

Words  from  the  Hebrew  are  few,  and  drawn  mostly  from 
the  Bible.  The  masculine  plural  ends  in  -im  ;  cherubim,  ser- 
aphim, teraphim,  purim,  urim,  and  thummim.  Feminines 
end  in  -oth;  behemoth,  mazzaroth,  sabbaoth,  and  Succoth-Be- 
noth.  The  dual  number  ends  in  -aim,  but  is  found  only  in 
proper  names,  as  Mizraim  for  Egypt — that  is,  the  "  two  dis- 
tricts," of  Upper  and  Lower  Egypt ;  Diblathaim,  the  two 
Diblahs.  The  form  cherubims  in  the  Bible  is  a  double 
plural. 

French  Nouns. 

Nouns  still  retaining  a  French  character  occur  so  often 
both  in  literature  and  conversation  that  it  is  desirable  to 
know  something  of  the  principles  on  which  their  plurals  are 
formed.  As  in  English,  the  plurals  generally  end  in  s  ;  but 
when  the  singular  ends  in  a  sibilant — s,  x,  or  z — it  is  not 
necessary  to  add  another. 

fils,        a  son,  plural      fils 

choix,      a  choice,  "  choix 

nez,         the  nose,  "  nez 

Nouns  ending  in  au,  eau,  eu,  or  oeu,  add  not  merely  s,  but  x, 
Esquimau,  plural  Esquimaux. 


bandeau 

feu 

rondeau 

beau,     s 

flambeau 

tableau 

bureau,     s 

morceau 

trousseau 

chapeau 

plateau 

voeu 

chateau 

radeau 

252 


English  Grammar, 


There  is  of  course  a  general  tendency  to  assimilate  all 
these  words  to  the  English  usage.  Bureau  is  the  oftenest 
used,  and  perhaps  the  most  unsettled.  It  is  oftener  written 
with  s  than  with  x.  The  United  States  statutes,  and  the 
acts  of  the  executive  government  generally,  give  bureaus, 
but  the  Adjutant-General  of  the  Army,  one  of  the  fountain- 
heads  of  ancestral  etiquette,  writes  bureaux. 

Six  nouns  ending  in  -ou  add  -x  in  the  plural. 

bijou,       a  jewel  genou,       the  knee 

caillou,    a  pebble  hibou,        an  owl 

chou,       a  cabbage  joujou,      a  plaything 

Other  nouns  in  -ou  take  s. 
Twenty-one  nouns  change  -al  to  -aux. 


amiral 

animal 

arsenal 

canal 

capital 

cheval 

cristal 


fanal 

g^n^ral 

hopital 

madrigal 

mal 

mar^chal 

m^tal 


mineral 

quintal 

rival 

signal 

total 

tribunal 

vassal 


The  others  merely  add  s. 

Eleven  change  the  singular  termination  -ail  to  -aux. 
others  generally  take  s. 


The 


ail, 

bail, 

corail, 

garlic 
a  lease 
coral 

sous-bail, 
travail. 

underlease 
work 

email, 
soupirail, 

enamel 
a  vent 

van  tail, 

a  folding  door 

Betail,  an  animal  of  the  cattle  kind,  has  a  plural  bestiaux. 

Nouns  of  one  syllable  ending  in  -ant  or  -ent  add  s — gant,  a 
glove,  plural,  gants ;  dent,  a  tooth,  dents.  Those  of  more 
than  one  syllable  generally  omit  the  t — enfant,  a  child, 
enfans. 

Italian  Nouns. 

The  Italian  nouns  met  with  in  English  books  form  their 
plurals  mostly  in  a  very  simple  and  regular  manner.    Mascu- 


Nouns.  253 

lines,  whatever  their  terminations  may  be,  change  the  final 
vowel  of  the  singular  to  i  in  the  plural. 


profeta 

a  prophet 

profeti 

padre 

a  father 

padri 

fratello 

a  brother 

fratelli 

zio 

an  uncle 

zii 

desio 

desire 

desii 

When  the  final  vowel  is  preceded  by  an  unaccented  /,  a 
second  i  is  not  added — tempio,  a  temple,  plural,  tempi. 
There  are  also  the  following  irregularities : 


hue 

an  ox 

buoi 

Dio 

'God 

dei  and  dii 

uomo 

man 

uomini 

All  masculines  ending  in  -ca,  and  most  of  more  than  one 
syllable  ending  in  -co  add  h  after  the  c  in  the  plural,  to  pre- 
serve the  sound. 


duca 

a  duke 

duchi 

monarca 

a  monarch 

monarchi 

banco 

a  bank 

banchi 

imbarco 

embarcation 

imbarqui 

amico 

a  friend 

amici 

medico 

aphysician 

medici 

Those  ending  in  -go^  except  some  words  of  more  than  two 
syllables,  in  which  the  g  follows  a  vowel,  insert  an  h  in  the 
plural  for  the  same  reason. 

sugo  sugar  sughi 

luogo  a  place  luoghi 

Feminines  in  a  change  it  to  e  in  the  plural. 

casa  a  house  case 

strada  a  street  strade 

Those  ending  in  e  or  o,  change  it  to  i  in  the  plural. 

madre  a  mother  madri 

nube  a  cloud  nubi 

mane  a  hand  mani 


254  English  Grammar, 

Nouns  ending  in  an  accented  vowel,  and  feminines  in  -ie, 
are  alike  in  the  singular  and  plural,  except  moglie,  a  woman 
of  which  the  plural  is  mogli. 

There  are  as  usual  some  exceptions,  but  they  are  not 
likely  to  fall  in  the  way  of  one  whose  reading  is  confined  to 
English  books. 

Compound  Nouns. 

A  great  number  of  English  nouns  are  formed  by  uniting 
two  or  more  into  one.  The  closeness  of  the  union  varies  in 
every  degree.  Codfish,  cowslip,  and  shepherd  we  scarcely 
think  of  as  compounds ;  dairy-fariA  and  dead-reckoning  are 
held  together  by  feeble  and  transitory  ties.  The  general 
principle  is  that  the  last  element  is  the  essential  one,  and  all 
that  precedes  it  is  only  descriptive,  and  of  the  nature  of  an 
adjective.  A  cart-horse  is  a  horse,  and  a  horse-cart  is  a  cart, 
the  first  syllable  in  each  instance  serving  as  an  adjective. 
And  as  adjectives  in  our  language  do  not  express  number, 
the  sign  of  plurality  is  added  only  to  the  last  part.  Thus 
we  have  cart-horses  and  horse-carts  ;  and  those  who  speak  of 
handsful  and  spoonsful  are  ignorant  of  the  best  established 
principles  of  the  language.  It  matters  not  that  the  first 
element  may  represent  a  great  number.  A  hundred  cows 
grazing  in  a  field  may  make  it  a  ^^w-pasture,  but  never  a 
f<7Wj-pasture  ;  and  a  team  of  twenty  oxen  is  only  an  <?jtr-team. 
Three  or  more  nouns  may  be  combined  into  one.  Dog- 
tooth-spar is  a  spar,  or  crystalline  mineral,  that  is  not  only 
shaped  like  a  tooth,  but  like  the  tooth  of  a  dog :  still  the 
plural  would  never  be  dogs-teeth-s^^LX. 

The  principle  here  laid  down  is  fundamental  and  general, 
but  subject  to  some  real  or  apparent  exceptions.  In  arms- 
length,  beadsmany  bondsman,  gownsman,  headsman,  oars-man, 
swordsman,  etc.,  the  s  is  not  plural  but  possessive,  and  the 
plurals  are  regularly  formed.  When  the  elements  of  a  com- 
pound are  so  combined  as  to  show  in  any  way  which  is  the 
essential  one,  that  is  the  one  to  take  the  sign  of  plurality. 
A  brother-in-law  is  not  a  law,  but  a  brother  in,  by,  or  accord- 


Nouns.  255 

ing  to  law,  and  the  plural  is  brothers-in-law,  just  as  the  plural 
of  a  barrel  of  flour  is  barrels  of  flour,  and  not  barrel  oi  flours. 
The  hyphen  joining  the  two  parts  does  not  affect  their  rela- 
tion to  each  other.  A  few  expressions  have  the  noun  before 
the  adjective,  in  imitation  of  the  French, — cousin-german, 
falcon-gentil.  The  plurals  are  cousins-gertnan,  falcons-gentil, 
formerly  written  entirely  in  the  French  manner,  with  an  s 
added  to  each  part.  Chaucer,  in  the  "  Tale  of  Melibeus," 
wrote  cousins-germans ;  and  letters-patents  occurs  in  a  state 
paper  dated  July  25,  1400,  preserved  in  Rymer's  "  Federa." 
Some  compounds,  survivals  from  the  Middle  Ages,  still  add 
s  to  both  parts. 

Knights  bachelors  Knights  companions 

bannerets  Knights  hospitallers 


Knights  -j 


banneret  Knights  grand  crosses 

Knights  commanders  Knights  Templars 

It  is  not  uncommon  to  hear  people  speak  of  a  well-known 
benevolent  organization  as  the  knight  templars ;  and  the 
War  Department,  in  a  circular  of  September  27,  1886,  and 
several  newspapers  of  the  period,  called  the  order  knights 
templar,  whether  from  ignorance  or  with  intent  to  improve 
the  language,  I  do  not  know.  Nothing,  however,  is  better 
established  in  our  literature  than  the  form  Knights  Templars, 
etc.,  for  which  the  general  reader  may  consult  Burke's 
"  Book  of  Knighthood,"  the  works  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  and 
the  recent  and  respectable  authority  of  the  Encyclopedia 
Britannica,  article  "  Knighthood." 

The  formation  of  such  double  plurals  is  not  confined  to 
the  orders  of  knighthood.  We  also  read  of  the  ^^  Lords 
Marchers,''  "  the  Lords  High  Admirals,''  "  the  Lords  Jus- 
tices^' "the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury."  We 
might  reconcile  these  expressions  with  our  ideas  of  propriety 
by  supposing  the  words,  "  who  are,"  to  be  understood  be- 
tween the  plural  words.  We  might  suppose  the  gentlemen 
last  indicated  to  be  primarily  and  essentially  Lords,  who, 
for  the  time  being,  are  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury. 
But  this  will  probably  not  hold  good  throughout ;  and  the 


256  English  Grammar. 

learner  has  to  be  often  reminded  that  language  is  full  of 
inconsistencies. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  may  suppose  that  the  "  Lord 
Chancellors,"  the  "  Lord  Lieutenants,"  and  the  "  Lord 
Mayors  "  are  not  necessarily  Lords  in  their  own  right.  The 
"  Lord  "  is  only  a  part  of  the  title. 

Some  titles  made  up  of  two  or  more  words  illustrate  the 
general  principle  that  the  leading  word  is  the  noun,  and 
alone  takes  the  sign  of  plurality.  There  are  Envoys  Extra- 
ordinary^ Ministers  Plenipotentiary^  and  Consuls  General. 
General  VIZ.?,  primarily  an  adjective,  but  in  time  certain  gen- 
eral oflficers  dropped  their  distinctive  titles,  were  called 
merely  generals,  and  so  the  word  came  to  be  sometimes  an 
adjective  and  sometimes  a  noun.  I  have  before  me  a  book 
entitled  "Opinions  of  the  Attorneys  General" ;  and  Post- 
masters General,  Adjutants  General,  Paymasters  General,  are 
pretty  well  established  both  by  ofificial  and  common  usage ; 
yet  there  are  occasional  dissenting  voices.  The  American 
Medical  Association,  in  a  memorial  to  Congress,  in  1874, 
speaks  of  Surgeon  Generals  ;  and  "  Inspector  Generals  "  occurs 
in  an  act  of  Congress  dated  March  19,  1862. 

When  signifying  a  military  ofificer  of  a  certain  grade,  gen- 
eral is  a  noun,  and  the  class  is  differentiated  into  brigadier 
generals,  major  generals,  etc. ;  for  a  major  general  is  ^general 
and  not  a  major.  But,  unfortunately,  the  major  is  an  un- 
stable element  in  the  compound,  for  sergeant-majors  (the 
expression  is  a  bad  one)  are  sergeants  and  not  majors ;  and 
drum-majors  are  neither  majors  nor  drums.  The  British  Army 
Regulations  recognize  Sergeant  Majors,  Drum  Majors,  Bugle 
Majors,  and  Trumpet  Majors ;  and  in  the  American  armies 
I  have  met  with  jife-majors  that  were  quite  plain  fifers. 

There  are  a  great  number  of  appellations,  each  consisting 
of  two  or  more  words,  the  plurals  of  which  are  in  an  unsettled 
and  unsatisfactory  state.  The  principle  above  laid  down, 
however  sound,  is  not  followed  consistently.  Moreover,  it 
is  not  always  obvious  which  word  of  a  number  is  the  essential 
one ;  but  we  can  generally  analyze  an  expression  and  dis- 
cover what  would  accord  with  the  fundamental  analogies  of 


Nouns.  257 

the  language.  It  may  save  the  reader  some  trouble  to 
restate  the  principle  that  applies  here. 

The  essential  name  or  noun  alone  bears  the  mark  of 
plurality.  It  is  regularly  placed  last,  and  all  qualifying  or 
descriptive  words  precede  it. 

In  the  further  discussion  of  this  subject,  all  examples 
marked  as  quotations  are  taken  from  printed  books  or  publi- 
cations, and  when  important  the  sources  will  be  given.  The 
opinions  of  writers  upon  grammar  are  very  conflicting,  and 
but  little  importance  is  attached  to  them,  as  they  are  gener- 
ally mere  individual  judgments  given  without  the  support  of 
any  reason  or  principle.  Still,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to 
glean,  the  majority  agree  with  what  here  follows  relative  to 
compounds  of  which  one  part  is  an  individual  proper  name. 
In  our  modern  life  we  may  treat  the  name  of  a  person  as 
consisting  of  two  parts — Thomas  Osborne.  It  is  common  to 
call  the  first  of  these  the  Christian  name,  and  the  other  the 
surname.  But  the  expressions  are  very  ill  chosen.  Our 
Hebrew  friend,  Moses  Rosengarten,  cannot  properly  be 
said  to  have  a  Christian  name  ;  and  surname  ought  to  mean 
a  name  super-added — a  nickname — like  Longshanks,  or  Red- 
beard.  More  properly,  the  second  name  is  the  family  name, 
the  first  the  personal  name.  Our  personal  names  are 
largely  borrowed  from  the  Jews ;  our  system  of  naming 
from  the  Romans.  Our  family  name,  corresponding  to  the 
Latin  noinen  and  cognomen  united,  is  the  principal  name. 
We  speak  of  Bacon,  Shakespeare,  Milton,  Newton,  Wash- 
ington ;  not  Francis,  William,  John,  Isaac,  or  George. 
These  latter  would  be  as  good  as  no  names  at  all, — little 
more  distinctive  than  the  pronouns  he  and  they.  The 
personal  names  of  even  distinguished  men  are  seldom  heard, 
and  many  persons  could  not  tell  those  of  Descartes,  Goethe, 
and  Wordsworth.  According,  therefore,  to  the  soundest 
analogy,  the  family  name  is  to  be  placed  last,  and  should 
bear  the  s  of  plurality.  If  any  other  word  makes  such  a 
claim,  it  should  be  required  to  show  its  grounds  of  title.  If 
there  were  two  cousins  bearing  in  common  the  name  Mary 
Brent,  I  think  it  would  be  proper  to  speak  of  them  as  the 


258  English  Grammar. 

two  Mary  Brents,  and  not  the  two  Maries  Brent.  The  last 
is  the  essential  name,  to  which  the  other  stands  related  as 
an  adjective.  This  holds  good  where  both  personal  and 
family  names  agree. 

Suppose  now  we  have  Mary  Brent  and  Sarah  Brent,  can 
we  unite  them  into  a  plural  ?  Only  imperfectly,  and  by 
ellipsis, —  Mary  and  Sarah  Brent.  Mary  and  Sarah  Brents 
would  be  no  better  than  a  two-story  and  a  three-story  houses. 
Or  let  there  be  Mary  Brent  and  Mary  Barnet ;  then,  although 
I  cannot  prove  the  position,  I  think  the  Maries  Brent  and 
Barnet  would  not  be  good,  but  we  should  name  each  in  full. 

"  Yestreen  the  queen  had  four  Maries, 
To-night  she  has  but  three. 
There  were  Mary  Seatoun  and  Mary  Beatoun, 
And  Mary  Carmichael  and  me." 

Sometimes  the  first  part  of  a  composite  designation  is  not 
a  personal  name  but  merely  a  designation  of  rank,  office, 
position,  or  occupation,  as  King,  Duke,  Lord,  Judge,  Doc- 
tor, Professor ;  or  it  may  be  a  mere  title  of  courtesy,  in 
itself  signifying  nothing :  Sir,  Mr.,  Mrs.,  Miss.  Let  w  and 
X  represent  terms  belonging  to  these  two  classes  respec- 
tively. Again  the  several  persons  may  have  the  same  or 
different  names.    There  are  then  four  possible  combinations : 

ist,  w .  a -\- b  -^r  c         2d,  w  .  a  -\-  a  -^  a    =     w  .  ^^ 
3d,  X  ,a-\-b-\-c        4th,  X  .a  -{-  a  -{-  a     ===    x  .^a 

I  do  not  press  the  circumstance  that  in  the  second  and 
fourth  cases  the  family  name  naturally  becomes  plural. 
The  reasons  bearing  upon  the  subject  do  not  apply  equally 
to  these  four  cases. 

Case  1st.  The  title  may  be  repeated  with  each  name. 

"  lord  Livingston,  lord  Boyd,  lord  Herris." 

Robertson  :  "  Hist,  of  Scotland." 

This  is  always  safe  and  correct,  and  is  preferred  by  those 
who  wish  to  be  both  courteous  and  exact.  As  the  title  is 
significant  it  is  sometimes  the  most  important  part,  the 
names  being  added  merely  by  way  of  explanation. 


Nouns.  259 

**  The  two  potent  earls,  Edwin  and  Morcar,  had  fled  to 
London."— Hume  :  "  Hist,  of  England." 

"  All  this  was  managed  by  three  or  four  aspiring  bishops, 
Maxwell,  Sidserfe,  Whitford,  and  Bannantine." 

Bp.  Burnet  :  "  Hist." 

This  is  perhaps  the  starting-point  of  the  usage,  and  is 
aided  by  the  circumstance  that  feudal  nobles  were  lords  of 
certain  estates. 

"the  bishop  of  Orkney,  the  earls  of  Rothes  and  Casilis,  lord 
Fleming,  lord  Seton,  the  Prior  of  St,  Andrews, 

Robertson  :  "  Hist." 

But  the  general  practice   is   now  to   make  the  first  factor 
plural. 

"  Drs.  Whitcot,  Cudworth,  Wilkins,  More,  and  Worthington." 

Bp,  Burnet. 
This  can  be  reconciled  with  the  analogies  of  the  language 
only  by  assuming  the  title  to  be  the  essential  part,  to  which 
the  name  is  subordinate.     The  only  permissible  alternatives 
are  wa  -f-  w^  +  "^c  and  "i^w  {a  -\-  b  ■\-  c). 

Case  2d.  The  most  eminent  writers  on  grammar,  including 
Matzner  and  Dr.  Priestley,  agree  that  the  mark  of  plurality 
should  be  attached  to  the  name  and  not  to  the  title.  Dr. 
Priestley  says :  "  When  a  name  has  a  title  prefixed,  as  Doctor, 
Miss,  Master,  etc.,  the  plural  affects  only  the  latter  of  the 
two  words;  as  the  two  Doctor  Nettletons,  the  two  Miss 
Thompsons  " ;  and  Goldsmith  mentions :  "  The  two  Doctor 
Thomsons,"  following  the  example  of  Shakespeare's  "  three 
Doctor  Faustuses  "  in  the  "  Merry  Wives,"  v.,  5, 

"  Whence  hapless  Monsieur  much  complains  at  Paris 
Of  wrongs  froiri  Duchesses  and  Lady  Maries." 

Pope's  "  Dunciad,"  book  ii,,  i.,  135. 

Dr.   Latham   gives   the   great  weight  of    his   authority   in 
favor  of 

"  the  two  King  Williams." — **  English  Language,"  p.  399, 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  opposite  mode  of  expres- 
sion is  quite  as  common.      Carlyle  speaks  of  the  "  Kings 


26o  English  Gramma f 


'2> ' 


John  "  ("  Life  of  Frederick  the  Great,"  book  ii.,  chap,  xi.) ; 
but  Carlyle  is  a  writer  often  to  be  admired,  but  seldom  to 
be  imitated.  We  also  read  of  "  Dukes  Hamilton "  and 
"  Lords  Grey." 

Case  3d.  The  title  is  trivial,  never  the  principal  word,  and 
therefore  ought  not  to  bear  the  mark  of  plurality.  There 
may  be  an  illustrious  king,  a  great  general,  an  eminent 
judge ;  but  we  never  meet  with  a  great  Sir,  an  eminent 
Mr.,  or  an  illustrious  Mrs.  The  only  unquestionable  course 
is  to  give  each  title  and  name  in  full.  No  cultivated  Eng- 
lishman would  say :  Sirs  William  and  Robert,  or  Sirs  Wil- 
liam Graham  and  Robert  Sands. 

"  Sir  Edward  Parry,  Sir  James  Ross,  Sir  John  Ricfeardson,  Sir 
George  Back." — Edinb.  Review^  Oct.,  1853. 

But  a  few  years  ago  the  daily  papers  of  Washington  filled 
columns  with  matter  like  the  following : 

"  Sirs  James  R.  F.  Appleby,  John  C.  Athey,  J.  H.  Barbarin, 
H.  C.  Craig,  W.  B.  Easton." 

The  editors  probably  did  not  feel  called  upon  to  re-write 
the  matter  sent  to  them  for  publication. 

Strictly  speaking,  Mr.,  or  Mister ^  has  no  plural.  The  sub- 
stitute, Messrs.,  or  Messieurs,  remains  French  with  no  per- 
ceptible tendency  to  become  English.  Messrs.  Box,  Cox, 
Fox,  &  Co.  is  a  concession  to  the  hurry  and  urgency  of 
trade,  but  is  felt  not  to  belong  to  a  high  type  of  speech. 
If  we  must  have  a  common  title  for  all  men,  in  which  case  it 
ceases  to  mean  anything,  it  is  a  pity  that  it  could  not  be 
English,  either  native  or  adopted. 

Mrs.  is  in  a  still  worse  plight  than  Mr.  It  is  unfortunately 
pronounced  Missis,  and  we  do  not  often  hear  of  Missises. 
In  English  publications  we  find  Mesdames,  which,  as  a  word, 
has  no  connection  with  Mistress.  It  is  not  even  the  plural 
of  Madam,  but  of  Madame.  In  collecting  "  Society  "  no- 
tices for  several  years  in  the  city  of  Washington,  I  have  met 
with  the  word  only  once,  and  then  applied  to  strangers  and 
foreigners.     It  is  habitually  said  that  Mrs.  A,  Mrs.  B,  and 


Nouns.  261 

Mrs.  C,  were  present.  So  there  is  a  depth  of  bad  taste  that 
we  have  not  yet  sunk  to.  If  the  people  of  London  refuse  to 
say  "  Sirs,"  those  of  Washington  avoid  "  Mesdames,"  and  so 
may  call  the  matter  even.  But  then  we  often  encounter  in 
"  Society  "  the  Misses  Hop,  Skip,  and  Jump,  or  other  young 
ladies  of  equal  distinction.  I  should  prefer  to  allow  each  a 
repetition  of  the  title,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  matrons 
just  mentioned. 

Still  worse  than  any  of  the  examples  here  given,  is  the 
case  where  an  adjective  is  reduced  to  a  mere  fragment,  and 
then  treated  as  the  principal  word  and  made  plural. 

"  They  were  as  follows  :  Revs.  R.  Johnson,  Dr.  Faunce,  Hez. 
Swam,  T.  Outwater,  G.  W.  McCuUough,"  etc. 

Reverend  and  honorable  are  adjectives,  and  properly  have 
no  plural  forms. 

Case  4th.  If  there  were  two  knights  or  baronets,  each 
bearing  the  name  of  William  Thompson,  I  do  not  think 
that  any  correct  speaker  would  call  them  the  Sirs  William 
Thompson,  or  the  Sir  Williams  Thompson.  The  point  is  in- 
susceptible of  proof;  I  can  only  express  my  own  decided 
preference  for  the  Sir  William  Thompsons.  We  cannot  as 
in  other  cases  repeat  the  title  with  each  name,  as  there  is 
only  one  name. 

"  if  hee  were  twenty  Sir  John  Falstoffs  he  shall  not  abuse  Rob- 
eri  Shallow,  Esquire." — "  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor." 

**  May  there  not  be  Sir  Isaac  Newtons  in  every  science  ?  " 

Dr.  Watts. 
"  2nd  July.    I  went  from  Wotton  to  Godstone  (the  residence  of 
Sir  John  Evelyn),  where  was  also  Sir  John  Evelyn  of  Wilts,  when 
I  took  leave  of  both  Sir  J^ohns  and  their  ladies." 

"  Evelyn's  Diary,"  1649. 

The  genius  of  a  language  is  best  preserved  by  the  rural 
gentry  and  yeomanry,  who  live  remote  from  foreign  influ- 
ence. On  revisiting  the  home  of  my  childhood  after  an  ab- 
sence of  twenty-seven  years,  I  met  on  the  road  and  accosted 
an  old  neighbor.     He  looked  up  a  moment  and  said  :     "  It 


262  English  Grammar. 

is  one  of  the  Mister  Rapiseys,  is  it  not?"  The  reader  may 
think  this  poor  authority  ;  I  think  it  the  very  highest.  And 
what  else  should  he  have  said  ?  There  is  no  plural  of  Mister 
in  use ;  and  an  intelligent  farmer,  guiltless  of  aping  French 
fashions,  is  not  to  be  held  to  say  Messieurs. 

"  Both  the  Mr.  Bludyers  of  Mincing  Lane  have  settled  their 
fortunes  on  Fanny  Bludyer's  little  boy." 

Thackeray  :  "  Vanity  Fair." 

After  what  has  been  said  under  Case  3d,  we  may  con- 
clude that  the  wives  of  two  brothers  named  Brown  may 
properly  be  called  the  Mrs.  Browns.  But  the  young  ladies 
give  more  trouble.  We  are  continually  meeting  with  such 
groups  as,  "  Misses  Ada  Bond,  Bruden,  Coleman,  Aiken,  Cox, 
Henning,  Morsell."  "  Misses  Schmidt,"  "  the  Misses  Baker," 
and  "  the  Misses  Crouse."  When  one  tells  us  of  "  Mrs.  Con- 
dit  Smith  and  the  Misses  Condit  Smith,"  and  another  of 
"  Mrs.  and  the  Misses  Preston,"  or  "  Misses  and  Mrs.  John- 
son," the  identity  of  sound  is  at  least  confusing.  Although 
this  way  of  designating  young  ladies  is  not  the  only  one,  it 
has  been  for  a  good  many  years  the  most  common. 

Miss  is  a  contraction  or  corruption  of  Mistress,  which  last 
was  applied  to  women  irrespective  of  age  or  domestic  rela- 
tions down  to  the  time  of  Addison.  The  earliest  use  of 
Miss,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  occurs  in  "  Evelyn's  Diary  "  under 
date  of  January  9,  1662. 

"  In  this  *  *  *  acted  the  fair  and  famous  comedian  called 
Roxalana,  from  the  part  she  performed  ;  and  I  think  it  was  the 
last,  she  being  taken  to  be  the  Earl  of  Oxford's  Miss  (as  at  this 
time  they  began  to  call  lewd  women)." 

The  word  continued  to  be  used  occasionally  as  a  disreputable 
term  down  to  the  present  century ;  and  in  early  life  I  sev- 
eral times  heard  it  so  employed.  It  appears  as  a  title  dec- 
orating Miss  Prue  in  Congreve's  "Love  for  Love"  in  1695. 
When  applied  to  more  than  one  person  it  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  pluralized  at  first. 

Goldsmith  makes  us  acquainted  with  "the  Miss  Flam- 
boroughs  "    and    "  the  Miss  Wrinkles "   in   the   "  Vicar  of 


Nouns,  263 

Wakefield,"  and  "  the  Miss  Hoggs "  in  "  She  Stoops  to 
Conquer."  "  The  two  Miss  Montagues,"  "  Miss  Charlotte 
and  Miss  Patty  Montague,"  appear  in  Richardson's  "  Clarissa 
Harlowe,"  in  1748. 

"  Mrs.  Maplesone  and  the  Miss  Maplesones,  *  *  *  the  two 
Miss  Crumptons,     *    *    *     The  four  Miss  WiUises." 

Dickens  :   "  Sketches." 

"What  tricks  Theodore  and  I  used  to  play  on  our  Miss 
Wilsons." — Charlotte  Bronte  :   "Jane  Eyre." 

"  Don't  you  remember  the  two  Miss  Scratchleys  ?  *  *  *  j 
wish  you  could  have  seen  the  faces  of  the  two  Miss  Blackbrooks. 
*     *    *     Lady  Mcbeth  and  (2)  Miss  Mcbeths." 

Thackeray  :   "  Vanity  Fair." 

"  She  would  naturally  desire  that  the  Miss  Guests  should  behave 
kindly  to  this  cousin." — George  Eliot  :  "Mill  on  the  Floss." 

"Tell  me  about  the  Miss  Leyburns."  " The  two  Miss  Bate- 
sons."— "  Robert  Elsmere." 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  I  prefer  the  style  of 
these  last  quotations. 

Some  expressions  borrowed  unchanged  from  more  inflected 
languages  add  the  sign  of  plurality  to  both  parts : 

SINGULAR  plural 

compos  mentis  compotes  mentium 

ignis  fatuus  ignes  fatui 

latus  rectum  latera  recta 

Others  are  foreign  phrases  analogous  to  the  English  brother- 
in-law.  Lusus  natures,  a  sport  of  nature,  is  the  same  in  both 
numbers,  because  the  letters  of  lusus  are  so. 

aide-de-camp  aides-de-camp 

cheval^de-frise  chevaux-de-frise 

fleur-de-lis  fleurs-de-lis 

Cheval-de-frise  is  literally  a  horse  of  Friesland,  and  obviously 
the  plural  is  not  horses  of  Frieslands.  But  when  the  expres- 
sion ceases  to  be  true  to  the  original,  and  becomes  a  mere 
English  phrase,  an  s  should  be  added  only  at  the  end. 


264  English  Grammar, 

flower-de-luce  flower-de-luces 

aid-de-camp  aid-de-camps 

"  Nine  hundred  Fater  nosters  every  day, 
And  thrice  nine  hundred  Aves  she  was  wont  to  say." 

Spenser's  "  Faerie  Queene." 

Some  words  are  plural  only  in  appearance,  as  if  by  a  kind 
of  mimicry.     The  following  are  the  principal : 

Arras,  a  kind  of  tapestry  made  at  Arras  in  France. 

Cypers,  fine  muslin  named  from  Cyprus. 

Dolichos,  name  of  a  leguminous  plant. 

Guills,  the  corn  marigold. 

Gules,  the  red  color  in  heraldry, 

Nems,  an  animal  like  the  ichneumon. 

Psoas,  a  muscle  in  the  loin. 

Quickens,  dog-grass. 

Sanhedrim  has  the  appearance  of  a  Hebrew  plural,  but  is 
really  a  Greek  singular. 

Schnapps,  spirituous  liquor,  especially  gin. 

Summons,  not  plural  of  a  singular  summon^  but  from  an  old 
legal  French  term  semonse. 

Thrips,  an  insect  destructive  to  vines. 

W^OOS,  a  kind  of  sea-weed. 

If  words  like  these  mimic  plurality,  there  are  others  that 
may  be  said  to  mimic  humanity.  Compounds  whose  last 
part  is  man,  meaning  a  human  being,  change  it  to  men  in  the 
plural.  Such  are  horseman,  leman,  seaman,  yeoman,  woman, 
Welshtnan ;  but  others,  having  altogether  the  same  appear- 
ance, are  not  so  formed.  The  principal  words  that  have  the 
semblance  of  being  compounds  of  man  are  : 


ataman 

dolmen 

Ottoman 

brahman 

dragoman 

shaman    , 

cayman 

hetman 

Turcoman 

desman 

Mussulman 

all  of  which  add  .$• 

dollman 

norman,  a  short  wooden  bar 

But,  as  it  is  extremely  rare  to  find  anything  in  language 
consistent   throughout,   while   the   plural   of    Northman   is 


Nouns. 


265 


Northmen,  that  of  Norman — essentially  the  same  word — is 
Normans.  The  probable  reason  is  that  the  latter  reached  us 
not  as  a  native  Teutonic  but  as  a  French  word. 

There  are  also  expressions  often  used  as  nouns,  but  which 
are  so  only  by  a  kind  of  mimicry.  They  occur  chiefly  in 
accounts  of  legal  or  religious  proceedings,  and  have  oftenest 
the  appearance  of  being  Latin  nouns,  but  those  I  refer  to 
are  never  nominative  singulars,  and  so  do  not  admit  of  Latin 
plurality.  When  used  as  plurals  they  are  to  be  taken  as 
single  phrases,  and  s  added,  as  if  they  .were  English  words. 


aborigine,  ab  origine 

Kyrie 

quid  nunc 

aegrotat 

levari  facias 

qui  tam 

alias 

magnificat 

quorum 

alibi 

mandamus 

quota 

ave 

memento 

quo  warranto 

benedicite 

miserere 

rebus 

capias 

mittimus 

recipe 

certiorari 

nunc  dimittis 

retraxit 

credo 

omnibus 

scire  facias 

de  profundis 

omnium 

sederunt 

dirige 

pater  noster 

subpoena 

fiat 

pluries 

supersedeas 

fieri  facias 

postea 

Te  Deum 

gaudeamus 

praecipe 

veni  Spiritus 

habeas  corpus 

praemunire 

venire  facias 

ignoramus 

procedendo 

venite 

inspeximus 

propaganda 

These  are  conspicuous  words  in  certain  formulas,  and  so 
have  gained  currency  as  their  names. 

A  few  nouns  remain  with  peculiarities  that  do  not  admit 
of  classification. 

Acquaintance.  One  person  with  whom  we  are  intimate 
is  an  acquaintance ;  two  or  more  are  acquaintances ;  but, 
again,  the  collective  body  of  such  are  our  acquaintance. 

"  And  they  sought  him  among  their  kinsiolk  and  acquaintance." 

Luke  ii.,  44. 


266  English  Grammar. 

Alms.  Originally  and  properly  singular ;  Greek,  ik^r]- 
fxoffvvrf}  ecclesiastical  Latin,  ele'emosyna ;  A.-S.,  CBlmcesse^  in 
three  syllables.  Robert  of  Gloucester,  A.D.  1303,  wrote  it 
almesse,  still  three  syllables.  Next  the  final  syllable  was 
dropped.  Wycliffe,  Sir  Thomas  More,  and  the  Bible  of 
1 5 13  make  it  almes.  Lastly  the  e  was  elided  and  the  original 
six  syllables  reduced  to  one.  The  most  familiar  evidence 
that  the  word  is  properly  singular  is  the  passage.  Acts  iii.,  3, 
where  the  lame  man  asks  "  an  alms "  of  Peter  and  John. 
Steele  also  in  the  beginning  of  the  last  century  spoke  of  "  a 
plentiful  alms."  The  many  compound  words,  too,  in  which 
alms  serves  as  an  adjective — alms-basket,  alms-deed,  alms- 
house— show  that  the  word  is  properly  singular ;  still  it  is 
now  treated  oftenest  as  a  plural. 

Aloes.  Is  the  word  singular  or  plural  ?  two  syllables  or 
three  ?  In  any  case  the  word  has  been  applied  to  two 
entirely  different  things.  First  there  is  lignaloes,  which  I 
know  only  as  a  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  ahalim  in  the  proph- 
ecy of  Balaam,  Num.  xxiv.,  6,  although  the  same  article  is 
mentioned,  Psalm  xlv.,  9  (Hebrew  text),  Prov.  vii.,  17,  and 
Canticles  iv.,  14,  where  our  version  has  merely  aloes.  In  the 
four  passages  of  the  Hebrew  text  the  word  is  twice  mascu- 
line and  twice  feminine,  but  always  plural.  As  the  Greeks 
heard  the  word  spoken  by  Phoenician  traders  *  they  picked 
it  up  as  aloe,  and  they  and  the  Romans  treated  it  as  a  sin- 
gular. The  name  lignaloes  is  the  Latin  lignum-aloes — wood 
of  the  aloe — slightly  anglicized.  The  last  part  of  the  name 
is  not  plural  but  a  Greek  singular  genitive ;  and  I  suspect 
that  this  unusual  Latin  form  may  have  led  to  the  treatment 
of  the  word  in  English  as  a  plural — in  short  that  like  several 
others  it  is  a  plural  through  mistake.  The  article  denoted 
by  the  name  is  a  sweet-smelling  Indian  wood,  allied  to  san- 
dal-wood, still  an  article  of  commerce  under  the  name  of 
eagle-wood,  and  the  resin  obtained  from  the  same.  Botanists 
call  the  tree  agallochum,  or  aquilaria.   This  is  the  only  aloes 

'  Bochart  long  ago  observed  (Phaleg,  ii.,  31)  that  all  the  names  of  spices 
among  the  Greeks  were  Shemitic  and  received  from  the  Phoenicians.  Compare 
Gen.  xxxvii.,  25. 


Nouns.  267 

known  to  Scripture,  and  has  no  connection  with  medicinal 
aloes.  The  name  is  most  correctly  pronounced  as  three 
syllables,  as  in  the  metrical  version  of  the  Psalms  used  in 
the  Church  of  Scotland. 

"  Of  cassia,  myrrh  and  aloes 
A  smell  thy  garments  had." 

Psalm  xlv. 

The  drug  known  as  aloes  is  the  dried  juice  of  several 
species  of  large  tropical  plants.  How  the  name  came  to  be 
transferred  from  the  one  vegetable  product  to  the  other  is 
not  clear.  Possibly  the  dried  juice  of  the  plant  had  a  re- 
semblance to  the  resin  of  the  tree.  Our  Saxon  forefathers 
adopted  the  word  as  a  plural  under  the  form  alewan. 

"And  Nichodemus    *    *    *    brohte  wyrt-gemang  and  a/<?a'a«." 

John  xiii.,  39. 

Through  all  changes  the  word  has  kept  the  plural  form  in 
English,  but  it  is  used  as  singular  or  plural  almost  indif- 
ferently. Lexicographers  incline  to  treat  it  as  singular, 
while  medical  men  generally  use  it  as  a  plural. 

Amends  has  had  the  plural  form  since  the  early  part  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  but  is  used  with  a  singular  verb. 

Bellows — A.-S.  baelg,  baelig,  bylig,  belg,  a  bag,  the  belly : 
used  in  the  plural,  bean-belgas,  for  bean-pods ;  spelled  bely  by 
Chaucer,  of  which  the  plural  was  belies.  The  present  form  is 
clearly  plural  like  tongs,  pincers,  and  other  implements  com- 
posed of  corresponding  halves  ;  yet  it  is  generally  treated  as 
singular. 

"  flattery  is  the  bellows  blo^vs  up  sin." 

Shakesp.:  "Pericles,"  i.,  2. 

"  They  watched  the  laboring  bellows. 
And  as  its  panting  ceased." 

Longfellow. 

Breeches — a  double  plural.  A.-S.  brdc,  plural  br^c,  like 
the  plurals  of  book,  foot,  goose,  tooth,  etc.,  or  rather  of  their 
A.-S.    originals.     Middle    English    plural    breke  or   breche. 


268  English  Grammar. 

When  men  began  to  forget  that  breche  or  breech  was  plural 
they  added  es. 

Cattle — Middle  English  catel  and  chatel,  identical  with  the 
old  French  catel  and  chaiel,  derived  remotely  from  the  Latin 
caput,  the  head,  through  capitalis,  capitale,  pi.  capitalia,  capi- 
tal. At  first  property  of  any  kind,  but  chiefly  domestic 
animals.  Of  the  two  forms  one  became  cattle,  expressing 
plurality  in  the  form  of  a  singular,  and  the  other  became 
chattel,  oftenest  used  in  the  plural. 

Cloth  signified  originally  either  a  garment  or  the  material 
from  which  it  might  be  made.  We  have  now  an  old  plural, 
clothes — a  very  unusual  form — meaning  garments,  and  a  new 
plural,  cloths,  for  material  not  made  up. 

Coal.  As  an  article  of  common  use  it  is  mostly  called 
coal  in  America  and  coals  in  England. 

Die,  from  Old  French  det,  later  d^,  pi.  dez,  des.  Chaucer 
has  a  plural  dys,  but  some  copies  give  dees,  which  is  etymo- 
logically  more  correct,  and  is  the  form  used  by  "  Piers  Plow- 
man." Shakespeare  makes  the  singular  dye  and  the  plural 
dice  ("Winter's  Tale,"  i.,  2,  133).  Bulwer  Lytton,  in  "Pel- 
ham,"  wrote  one  dice,  an  example  not  to  be  recommended. 
What  is  curious  about  this  word  is  that  its  compounds  and 
derivatives  are  made  from  the  plural  dice,  and  not  from  the 
singular  die — dice-box,  dice-player. 

"  There  is  such  dicing-houses  also,  they  say,  as  had  not  been 
wont  to  be,  where  young  gentlemen  dice  away  their  thrift,  and 
where  dicing  is  there  are  other  follies  also." 

Bp.  Latimer  :  Sermon  v.,  before  King  Edward. 

The  probable  reason  is  the  necessity  for  distinguishing  the 
three  words,  dying,  dyeing  and  dicing. 

Die,  as  an  instrument  for  stamping,  has  the  plural  dies. 

Haves — A.-S.  efese,  edge  or  brink,  is  etymologically  singu- 
lar ;  and  so,  like  alms,  plural  through  mistake.  As  the/"  was 
sounded  like  v,  one  of  the  first  changes  was  to  substitute  the 
latter.  It  was  still  a  singular  with  the  plural  written  eveses 
by  Robert  Manning,  otherwise  called  Robert  de  Brunne, 
1337.  and  "  Piers  Plowman,"  1362.    After  that  time  eves  was 


Nouns.  269 

mistaken  for  a  plural  without  a  singular.  The  original  form 
is  shown  by  the  compounds,  which  are  made  with  eaves  and 
not  eave — eaves-board,  eaves-dropper. 

Folk — a  common  collective  word  for  an  indefinite  number 
of  persons,  for  the  community  in  general.  Used  with  a 
plural  verb.  In  England  it  is  more  common  to  say  folk 
are,  and  in  America  yi^/^j  are ;  but  the  usage  is  not  uniform 
in  either  country.  Here  folk  seems  rather  affected,  and  folks 
is  no  novelty  in  England. 

"  Yet  rcitrxy  folks  who  want  by  chance 
A  pair  to  make  a  country  dance, 
Call  the  old  house-keeper  and  get  her 
To  fill  a  place  for  want  of  better," 

Swift  :  "  Stella's  Birth  Day." 
"  Necessity  and  a  little  common  sense  produced  all  the  com- 
mon arts,  which  the  plain  folks  who  practised  them  were  not  idle 
enough  to  record." 

Walpole's  "  Anecdotes  of  Painting,"  chap.  5. 

Gallows — strictly  plural  of  a  singular  galloiv,  in  use  down 
to  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Kington  Oliphant 
("New  English,"  chap.  2)  quotes,  "4  payre  of  galowys" 
from  the  early  part  of  the  fifteenth  century.  This  instru- 
ment of  execution  was  next  called  simply  the  gallows,  and 
on  the  supposition  that  the  name  was  singular  a  duplicate 
plural,  gallowses,  was  formed. 

"  The  fear  of  gallowses  and  ropes 
Before  their  eyes  might  reconcile 
Their  animosities  a  while." 

"  Hudibras,"  part  iii.,  ii.,  716. 

I  have  also  met  with  gallowses  in  the  Spectator,  but  have 
mislaid  the  reference.  All  the  extant  compounds  are  made 
with  gallows — none  with  gallow. 

Genius  has  a  Latin  plural  genu  for  the  creatures  of  Eastern 
fable  and  story,  and  English  geniuses  for  persons  of  rare 
mental   gifts. 

Horse.  We  use  korse  for  one  animal,  horses  for  several, 
and  again  horse  for  a  body  of  cavalry  or  troops  on  horseback. 


270  English  Grammar. 

Horse  and  foot,  a  phrase  that  came  into  use  in  the  early  part 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  may  be  an  abbreviation  for 
horsemen  and  footmen.  The  collective  singular,  horse,  is  not 
generally  applied  to  animals  without  riders,  yet  Byron's 
"  Mazeppa "   was   met   by 

"  A  thousand  horse,  and  none  to  ride." 

Index  has  a  Latin  plural,  indices,  for  the  characters  that 
distinguish  algebraic  powers  and  roots,  and  the  English 
indexes,  when  the  word  is  employed  otherwise. 

Madam,  Fr.  Madame,  ma  dame,  Latin  m.ea  domina,  Eng. 
my  lady.  At  present  no  other  plural  is  in  use  than  Mesdames, 
which  is  sadly  out  of  tune  with  our  mother  tongue.  As 
Madam,  is  no  longer  pure  French,  I  think  Madams  not  only 
permissible  but  preferable. 

Means — Old  French  meien.  Mod.  Fr.  moyen,  Latin  me- 
dium from  medius,  middle  ;  used  as  a  noun  or  an  adjective 
in  reference  to  a  point  between  extremes,  as  mean  time, 
mean  annual  temperature,  a  safe  mean  between  extremes. 
It  next  gets  the  sense  of  an  intermediate  agency  by  the  aid 
of  which  anything  is  done. 

"  The  virtuous  conversation  of  Christians  was  a  mean  to  work 
the  conversion  of  the  heathen." — Hooker. 

But  in  this  sense  it  generally  takes  the  plural  form.  The 
word  occurs  thirty-two  times  in  the  Bible,  but  always  as 
means.  It  takes  singular  or  plural  verbs  and  pronouns 
indifferently. 

"By  this  means  thou  shalt  have  no  part  on  this  side  the  river." 

Ezra  iv.,  16. 
"By  these  means,  the  queen  had  collected  an  army  twenty 
thousand  strong." — Hume's  "  Hist,  of  England,"  chap.  xxi. 

Memorandum  has  two  plurals,  Lat.  and  Eng.  memoranda 
and  memorandums.  A  useful  distinction  is  sometimes  made 
by  confining  the  former  to  a  number  of  notes  taken  collec- 
tively, and  the  latter  to  notes  that  are  separate  and  inde- 
pendent.    For  example :  "  He  shewed  me  a  paper  containing 


Nouns.  271 

memoranda  relating  to,"  etc.  "  He  drew  from  his  pocket  a 
number  of  memorandums^ 

Mister — a  thin  and  meagre  degradation  of  Master,  sup- 
posed to  be  formed  in  imitation  of  Mistress,  which  latter  is 
from  maister-ess.  It  is  rarely,  if  at  all,  met  with  in  the 
plural,  for  which  the  French  Messieurs  is  commonly  used. 
Mister  is  bad.  Madam  worse,  but  Mesdames  and  Messieurs, 
set  among  English  words,  are  utterly  execrable. 

Molasses.  The  older  form  melasses  was  more  correct, 
being  a  regular  plural  of  the  Fr.  melasse,  from  the  Portu- 
guese mela^o.  The  word  is  a  true  plural,  and  was  formerly 
so  used  : 

"  The  molasses  will  find  their  own  outlets." 

Beckford's  "Account  of  Jamaica,"  1790,  vol.  ii.,  p.  79. 

See  also  Encyclopedia  Britannica,  Art.  "  Sugar."  It  is  now 
very  commonly  treated  as  a  singular. 

News  and  tidings,  plurals  in  form  construed  as  singulars. 

Odds,  meaning  odd  things,  came  into  use  about  a.d.  i  500. 
It  soon  took  the  sense  of  difference  or  inequality,  and  in  a 
hundred  years  began  to  be  used  as  a  singular  : 

"  I  cannot  speake 
Any  beginning  to  this  peevish  oddes" 

"  Othello,"  ii.,  iii.,  185. 

and  is  now  treated  indifferently  as  singular  or  plural. 

Penny  has  two  plurals.  Six  coins  of  that  denomination 
are  six  pennies ;  their  value  is  sixpence,  which  admits  of  a 
plural  of  the  second  order,  in  a  handful  of  silver  sixpences. 

Pox,  the  only  plural  in  x,  standing  iox pocks,  the  plural  of 
pock,  meaning  the  disease  now  commonly  called  small-pox. 

"Yes,  I  have  known  a  lady  sick  of  the  %x{i2Xi  pocks,  only  to 
keep  her  from  pit-holes,  take  cold,  strike  them  in  again,  kick  up 
her  heels,  and  vanish." 

Beaum.  &  Fletch.,  "  Fair  Maid  of  the  Inn." 

That  pock  is  the  true  singular  appears  from  its  use  as  an 
adjective  va  pock-m^rk,  pock-pitted,  etc. ;  yet  pox  is  now  used 
entirely  as  a  singular. 


272  English  Grammar. 

Pulse.  There  are  two  quite  different  words.  The  one 
now  in  common  use  is  from  the  Lat.  pulsus,  a  stroke,  a  beat- 
ing, a  throbbing.  Curiously  enough,  it  was  often  mistaken 
for  a  plural  about  the  beginning  of  the  present  century,  when 
doctors  were  wont  to  say :  "  Your  pulse  are  weak  to-day." 
The  other  word  is  rarely  met  with,  but  is  an  old  collective 
term  for  peas,  or,  if  any  one  prefer,  pease,  singular  in  form 
but  construed  as  a  plural. 

"  And  Barzillai  the  Gileadite  of  Rogelim  brought  beds,  and 
basins,  and  earthen  vessels,  and  wheat,  and  barley,  and  flour,  and 
parched  corn,  and  beans,  and  lentiles,  and  parched  pulse." — 2 
Sam.  xvii.,  28. 

Riches — Fr.  richesse,  richness,  wealth — an  original  singu- 
lar, converted  into  a  plural  through  misapprehension  as  early 
as  Chaucer's  time. 

Sixpence — see  penny. 

Summons — from  Old  Fr.  semonse,  a  warning,  is,  and 
always  was,  a  singular,  although  it  has  the  appearance  of 
a  plural. 

Twelvemonth,  a  curious  singular  form  for  the  plural 
twelve  months.  Like  it  but  more  reduced  is  fortnight  for 
fourteen  nights. 

Wages,  from  the  singular  wage,  payment,  used  mostly  in 
the  plural  form  since  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth 
century. 

"  The  wages  of  labor,  however,  are  much  higher  in  North 
America  than  in  any  part  of  England." 

Smith's  "  Wealth  of  Nations." 

The  old  singular  is  often  seen  in  these  days  in  compound 
words  in  news-articles  relating  to  wage-workers. 

After  the  plural  forms  have  been  ascertained,  many  ques- 
tions arise  as  to  whether  certain  words  are  to  be  treated  as 
singular  or  plural.  If  the  form  alone  were  conclusive  there 
could  be  no  question  ;  but  singular  nouns  are  often  treated 
as  plurals,  and  plural  nouns  as  singular.  The  distinction 
depends  in  part  on  the  form  of  the  word,  and  partly  on  the 


Nouns.  273 

nature  of  the  thing  or  aggregate  signified  ;  and  we  need  not 
expect  strict  consistency  in  adjusting  conflicting  claims. 
Cattle^  singular  in  form,  is  always  treated  as  plural,  while 
game,  meaning  wild  animals  hunted  for  food  or  amusement, 
however  numerous,  is  singular.  So  is  stock,  which  is  nearly 
equivalent  to  cattle.  Poultry,  birds  domesticated  for  eco- 
nomic reasons,  and  craft,  a  marine  term,  are  either  singular 
or  plural. 

Nouns  singular  in  form,  denoting  collective  bodies  of  per- 
sons, are  sometimes  treated  as  singular,  and  at  other  times 
as  plural.  The  only  rational  principle  of  distinction  applica- 
ble here  is,  that  when  the  aggregate  acts  as  a  unified  body  it 
is  singular ;  where  the  action  or  passion  is  individual  the 
whole  is  to  be  treated  as  plural.  This  may  be  made  clearer 
by  a  few  examples,  and  first  by  three  that  I  deem  incorrect. 

"  The  prisoners  taken  in  this  action  had  their  right  foot  cut 
off. "—Hume  :  "  Hist,  of  England,"  chap.  iv. 

The  amputation  could  apply  to  the  prisoners  only  as  indi- 
viduals, and  they  must  have  had  more  than  one  right  foot 
among  them. 

"  The  circle  of  men  was  talking  indiscriminately  to  both." 

"  Robert  Elsmere." 
Better,  were  talking. 

"  There  was  a  score  of  candles  sparkling  round  the  mantle- 
piece."—"  Vanity  Fair." 

It  was  the  individual  candles  that  sparkled. 

We  may  properly  say  that  a  mob  crosses  a  bridge,  advances 
upon  the  city,  fills  and  obstructs  the  streets ;  but  the  mob 
shout,  throw  stones,  and  break  into  stores,  for  these  are  the 
acts  of  individuals,  those  of  a  collective  mass.  So  a  political 
party  is  singular  in  favoring  or  opposing  a  public  measure, 
but  plural  in  voting.  We  may  say  that  an  army  marches  at 
daybreak,  and  encamps  on  the  bank  of  a  river ;  but  we  never 
say  that  it  eats  breakfast,  puts  on  its  shoes,  or  washes  its  face. 

Again  a  class  of  persons  is  generally  plural ;  an  organized 
body,  acting  as  such,  is  singular. 


274  English  Grammar, 

The  clergy  are  exempt  from  military  duty. 

The  Senate  is  in  session. 

Branches  of  science  whose  names  end  in  -ics — acoustics, 
hydrostatics,  mathematics,  optics,  therapeutics — are  treated 
as  singular. 

"  Physics  regulates  more  completely  our  social  life  than  does 
his  acquaintance  with  surrounding  bodies  regulate  that  of  the 
savage." — Herbert  Spencer. 

A  proper  name,  plural  in  form,  is  correctly  used  as  a 
singular. 

"  The  Three  Sisters  (name  of  a  brig)  was  spoken  off  Cape 

Hatteras." 

"  *  The  Hundred  Wives '  is  to  be  acted  to-night." 

"  *  English  Bards  and  Scotch  Reviewers '  is  more  bitter  than 

witty." 

The  national  designation  of  this  country,  covering,  as  it 
now^  does,  forty-four  commonwealths,  is  sometimes  used  as 
a  singular,  and  sometimes  as  a  plural.  Unquestionably  it 
was  regarded  at  first  as  plural.  It  is  plural  in  the  Constitu- 
tion, in  President  Washington's  proclamation  of  April  22, 
1793,  and  in  the  letters  of  "  Pacificus  "  and  "  Helvidius  " 
(Hamilton  and  Madison)  ;  but  lately  it  is  beginning  to  be 
used  as  a  singular. 

The  name  is  treated  as  a  singular  in  the  treaty  with  Corea, 
ratified  May  22,  1882;  in  Blaine's  reply  to  Gladstone  in  the 
North  American  Review  for  January,  1890,  and  in  the  article 
"  United  States,"  written  for  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica 
by  Prof.  Johnston.  The  change  thus  begun  is  as  much 
political  as  grammatical.  In  the  early  days  of  the  Republic 
the  plurality  of  origin  was  kept  more  before  men's  minds 
than  the  unity  of  result.  They  emphasized  the  pluribus  of 
the  common  motto  rather  than  the  unum  ;  but  since  1865 
there  has  been  a  greater  feeling  of  nationality. 

Numbers  expressing  value,  magnitude,  distance,  etc.,  and 
not  individual  entities,  are  properly  treated  as  singular ; 
yet  usage,  which  is  much  divided,  inclines  to  plurality.  It 
will  be  readily  seen  how  harsh  and  strained  the  following  ex- 
amples are  as  plurals. 


Nouns,  275 

Two  hours  are  not  long  to  wait. 
Forty  degrees  below  zero  are  extremely  cold. 
Seven  feet  are  a  great  height  for  a  man. 
Ten  dollars  are  too  much  for  these  boots. 

The  best  writers  very  generally  speak  of  a  sum  of  money 
as  a  singular  unit. 

"  6oo,oool,  which  was  enough  to  procure  a  peace." 

Bp.  Burnet. 
"  A  thousand  a  year  was  thought  a  large  revenue  for  a  barris- 
ter."— Macaulay  :  "  Hist.,"  chap.  iii. 

"  Moreover  this  forty  millions  does  not  *  *  *  represent  the 
whole  amount  to  be  expended  under  the  Government  bill." 

Arthur  J.  Balfour. 

But  how  little  this  is  adhered  to  will  be  seen  by  three  in- 
stances— Sumner's  "  History  of  American  Currency,"  and 
the  reports  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  the  Direc- 
tor of  the  Mint  for  1889.  The  first  treats  a  sum  of  money, 
stated  in  figures  or  words,  as  plural ;  in  the  second  it  is  seven- 
teen times  plural  and  six  times  singular,  in  the  last  seventeen 
times  plural  and  five  times  singular.  The  distinction  does 
not  seem  to  depend  upon  any  principle. 

A  case  belongs  here  that  involves  the  question  of  what  is 
a  plurality.  Authorities  usually  give  two  definitions  as  if 
they  were  synonymous,  which  they  are  not,  viz.,  "  more 
than  one,"  and  "  two  or  more."  Now  \\  comes  under  the 
first,  but  not  under  the  second.  Is  it  then  singular  or  plural  ? 
The  short-hand  style  of  trade  adopts  \\  cents,  which  is  not 
according  to  sound  analogy.  One  and  a  half  loaves  is  equiv- 
alent to  a  whole  and  a  half  loaves,  which  certainly  would 
not  be  good.  The  correct  expression  is  a  loaf  and  a  half  = 
a  whole  loaf  and  a  half  loaf,  which  would  then  be  plural. 

THE   CASES   OF   NOUNS. 

Number  and  gender  are  inherent  and  permanent.  So  long 
as  they  live,  three  men  never  become  more  or  less  than 
three ;  nor  do  they  ever  change  their  gender  and  become 
women.    But  their  relations  to  other  persons  and  things  may 


276  English  Grammar. 

change  at  any  time,  and  to  an  indefinite  extent.  If  I  say, 
"  The  man  is  riding  a  bay  horse,"  the  man  is  the  principal 
thing  spoken  of,  and  he  is  represented  as  doing  something. 
But  if  I  say,  "  The  man's  horse  has  run  away,"  the  horse 
becomes  the  chief  actor,  and  the  man  is  named  only  on 
account  of  his  relation  of  ownership  to  the  animal.  Rela- 
tions between  things  may  be  expressed  in  several  ways,  of 
which  four  are  quite  common. 

First,  as  in  this  instance,  a  change  in  or  addition  to  the 
word. 

Second,  by  little  words  whose  oflfice  is  to  express  the 
relations  of  one  thing  to  others.  Such  are,  of,  to,  by,  from, 
with,  which,  from  being  very  often  placed  before  nouns,  are 
called  prepositions — that  is,  placings-before. 

Third. — Another  class  of  relations  are  expressed  by  such 
words  as  my,  your,  his,  etc. 

Fourth. — Certain  relations  are  expressed  by  words  repre- 
senting action  of  some  kind.  In  "  The  dog  chased  a  wolf," 
and  "A  wolf  chased  the  dog,"  the  relation  of  pursuer  and 
pursued  is  reversed. 

The  first  and  third  of  these  modes  usually  express  but  a 
small  number  of  relations  ;  the  fourth  is  limited  to  the  one 
general  relation  of  the  actor  and  the  thing  acted  upon,  un- 
less we  take  into  account  the  meaning  of  every  separate 
verb.  The  second  is  co-extensive  with  the  number  of  prepo- 
sitions. 

Although  there  is  not  entire  agreement  as  to  the  definition 
of  case,  it  is  very  generally  limited  to  the  first  above  model. 
I  shall  use  the  term  to  denote  a  modification  in  the  form  of 
a  noun  or  pronoun  to  express  a  relation,  not  anything  inher- 
ent in  the  subject  of  the  noun  or  pronoun. 

The  lively  fancy  of  the  Greeks  represented  that  form  of 
the  noun  which  denoted  the  doer  as  standing  upright,  and 
all  the  others  as  falling  away  from  it  at  varying  angles  of 
declination  or  "  declension.''  These  slanting  forms  they 
called  ptoseis,  or  fallings.  It  was  a  foolish  whim,  as  ground- 
less as  it  was  useless.  In  the  Greek  word  for  a  woman  the 
essential  part  is  gunaik,  but  that  form  which  represents  her 


Nouns.  277 

as  being  or  doing  anything  is  gU7ie,  a  wider  departure  than 
the  most  prostrate  of  the  fallen  cases.  The  Romans  trans- 
lated literally  the  ptoseis  of  the  Greeks,  and  called  them 
casus,  fallings,  our  modern  cases  ;  but  they  applied  the  name 
equally  to  what  the  latter  supposed  to  stand  upright.  They 
called  it  the  casus  rectus,  upright  case,  and  the  others  casus 
obliqui,  oblique  or  slanting.  To  their  practical  minds  the 
terms  denoted  merely  certain  variations  in  the  forms  of 
words.  There  have  been  persons  capable  of  arguing  that 
what  stood  upright  could  not  be  falling,  and  that  therefore 
what  Cicero  called  the  casus  rectus  was  not  a  case  at  all.  I 
am  not  sure  that  this  race  of  subtle  dialecticians  is  extinct 
yet. 

We  come  next  to  the  question,  how  many  cases  we  should 
reckon.  To  answer  this  the  definition  above  given  requires 
to  be  further  guarded.  If  it  should  so  happen  that  any 
word  had  two  case  forms  that  might  be  used  interchange- 
ably throughout,  having  no  difference  of  signification,  we 
might  properly  say  that  there  was  but  one  case  variously 
expressed.  Again,  if  a  certain  noun  had  but  one  form  to 
express  two  relations,  while  other  nouns  in  the  language 
had  two  forms,  we  should  conclude  that  the  exceptional 
word  had  two  of  its  cases  alike.  It  is  difficult  to  find  apt 
examples  in  English,  although  they  are  abundant  in  other 
languages,  but  the  following  will  give  an  approximate  idea. 
"  Moses'  law  "  and  "  Moses's  law  "  are  the  same  thing,  while 
"  sheep's  wool "  may  mean  the  wool  of  one  sheep  or  of 
several.  Moreover,  if  the  same  case  form  be  used  through- 
out the  language  for  three  different  relations,  that  will  not 
make  three  cases,  but  only  one  ;  and  it  matters  not  that  its 
place  is  taken  by  three  in  some  other  language.  What  is 
called  the  ablative  case  in  Latin  expresses  the //<a:^^  zf^(?r^ 
anything  is,  the  instrumentality  with  which  a  thing  is  done, 
and  the  source  from  which  anything  is  obtained ;  still  it  is 
only  one  case,  and  is  uninfluenced  by  the  circumstance  that 
in  Sanskrit  there  are  three  separate  cases  for  these  purposes. 
Hence  the  absurdity,  so  long  persisted  in,  of  assigning  to 
English  nouns  precisely  the  cases  claimed  for  Latin.     If  an 


278  English  Grammar. 

algebraic  expression  may  be  permitted,  to  make  n  cases 
there  must  be  n  forms  with  at  least  n  corresponding  func- 
tions. It  will  not  matter  that  in  some  particular  words  a 
part  of  what  are  supposed  to  have  been  once  separate  forms 
have  become  indistinguishable.  If  they  be  preserved  in  some 
other  words  of  the  same  class,  they  are  to  be  recognized. 

In  the  following  examples — "  The  tnan  is  waiting,  A  dog 
bit  the  man,  Man  /  wait  a  moment.  That  is  the  track  of  a 
man,  I  gave  the  letter  to  the  man,  The  horse  was  stopped 
by  the  man,  Go  with  the  man,  It  was  taken  from  the  man," 
— the  word  man  remains  unchanged,  and  any  noun  in  the 
language  would  yield  a  like  result.  How  many  cases  then 
are  here  exhibited  ?  I  think  there  is  only  one,  and  as  it  is 
used  in  so  many  different  relations,  I  shall  call  it  the  common 
case.  The  term  common  has  often  been  used  for  an  an- 
alogous purpose  in  reference  to  the  gender  of  mice,  spar- 
rows, and  the  like,  not  easily  distinguishable.  There  is  one 
other  form, — that  seen  in  the  sentence,  "  This  is  the  mans 
house,"  and  as  this  always  expresses  possession  or  ownership, 
I  shall  call  it  by  the  usual  name  of  the  possessive  case. 
Although  most  grammarians  have  recognized  at  least  three 
distinctions,  there  is  no  novelty  in  thus  limiting  them  to  two. 
The  same  thing  has  been  done  by  Ben  Jonson,  Charles 
Butler  (1633),  Fowle  ("True  English  Grammar"),  Web- 
ber, Jamieson  (Rhetoric),  Priestley,  Ash,  Bicknell,  Dalton, 
Hyde,  Clarke  (London,  1853),  Webster  ("  Imperial 
Grammar,"  1831),  Latham,  Maetzner,  and,  at  one  time,  by 
Lindley  Murray. 

For  reasons  similar  to  those  exhibited  in  the  chapter  on 
Word-Making,  it  is  now  generally  held  that  case  endings 
were  originally  separate  words — pronouns,  prepositions,  etc., 
that  they  became  by  frequent  repetition  closely  associated 
with  nouns,  that  by  rapid  and  careless  utterance  they 
gradually  lost  part  of  their  articulate  sounds  and  ceased  to 
be  recognizable  as  separate  words.  Nay,  they  became  in 
time  so  far  reduced  that  often  they  were  not  distinguishable 
from  each  other,  and  in  many  instances  not  a  vestige  of 
them  was  left.     But  at  their  best,  as  known  to  us,  they  have 


Nouns.  279 

generally  failed  to  indicate  all  the  relations  required  to  be 
expressed.  The  Hebrew  language  has  eleven  terminations 
for  nouns,  which  I  think  might,  without  overstraining  the 
term,  be  called  case  endings,  and  Magyar  has  twenty-four ; 
but  both  have  recourse  to  separate  words  to  express  many 
relations.  Latin  has  six  cases,  but  employs  besides  forty- 
three  prepositions.  Often  the  prepositions  render  the  case 
endings  unnecessary.  In  languages  as  we  now  know  them, 
separate  words  can  often  do  all  the  work  ;  case  endings  never 
can.  But  where  the  latter  are  competent,  they  are  the 
.neatest,  "  The  parson's  house  "  is  in  that  respect  better  than 
"  The  house  of  the  parson," — two  syllables  shorter.  Cases 
may  thus  become  matter  of  taste  rather  than  necessity — of 
ornament  than  use.  They  will  be  prized  by  the  scholar  who 
cultivates  elegance,  not  by  the  illiterate  who  need  great 
plainness.  So  there  is  a  constant  tendency  to  lose  case  end- 
ings. The  illustration  (p.  280)  of  their  gradual  decrease 
within  the  Aryan  family  of  languages  will  be  of  interest. 

The  Sanskrit  alone  appears  to  have  all  the  cases  complete ; 
yet  that  apparent  completeness  is  deceptive.  But  few  words 
have  separate  forms  for  all  the  cases  in  the  singular,  and 
none  have  them  in  the  dual  and  plural.  Moreover,  if  it  were 
possible  to  go  back  a  thousand  years  farther  into  the  dawn 
of  time,  we  might  find  that  the  extant  Sanskrit  had  lost  a 
number  of  cases  before  it  came  within  the  range  of  vision. 
No  noun  in  any  of  these  languages,  except  in  the  almost  un- 
inflected  English  and  French  classes,  has  all  the  forms  to 
which  it  is  theoretically  entitled.  One  case,  the  vocative,  is 
especially  defective.  When  it  differs  from  the  nominative  it 
is  shorter — adapted  to  shouts  and  exclamations.  It  is  never 
found  but  in  the  singular.  In  Latin  it  is  confined  to  the 
singulars  of  a  not  very  large  class  of  words ;  and  in  Russian 
to  a  few  archaic  terms  of  the  Church  service.  We  see  here 
how  the  number  of  cases  has  dwindled  till  Italian,  Spanish, 
and  French  nouns  have  no  trace  of  them.  In  English  the 
accusative  or  objective  case  is  found  only  in  the  seven  mono- 
syllables— me,  thee,  him,  her,  us,  them,  and  whom ;  and  in 
order  to  follow  the  analogy  of  these  pronouns  a  majority  of 


28o 


English  Grammar. 


Is 

> 

^ 

Ik 

u 

W 

."^ 

1-1 

o 
z 

0 
,£5 

1 

(U 
tn 
li 
0 

tn 

2  Z 

CJ 

C 

e 

OJ 

0) 

0) 

<u 

w  S 

TJ 

T3 

73 

^3 

9  (X 

(U 

(U 

_4J 

.H 

2  w 

•l-H 

«H 

«-l 

'C 

'u 

flH 

^ 

fx, 

U^ 

o  S 

<v 

0) 

tn 

0) 

>J  o 

1 

o  « 

0 

V 

0 

0 

0 

5^ 

to 

in 

tn 

in 

t;l 

,« 

«3 

t« 

«C 

tC 

o 

C/3 

CJ 

tn 

s 

H 

o 

o 

M 

^ 

^ 

^ 

^ 

tn 

tn 

tn 

tn 

tn 

VC 

« 

tC 

vC 

IS 

v« 

?»> 

0 

w 

s 

^ 

^ 

;^ 

S^ 

t-> 

^W 

W 

^^ 

^ 

»N 

^'•s* 

•'*«* 

r< 

^ 

r< 

i^ 

r< 

C 

0 

0 

0 

0 

k 

k 

te 

fe 

k 

tn 

S 

z 

1 

0 

5 

3 

0 

0 

,  _  ( 

H 

■t-> 

■4-> 

•*-> 

•t-> 

3 

c 

« 

a 

c 

fl 

a 

lU 

<u 

u 

<u 

lU 

(U 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

s 

0 

Ti 

<A 

'rt 

,i^ 

^ 

^ 

J« 

Ji 

M 

M 

C/3 

rC! 

X 

rC 

,c! 

IS 

iS 

)S 

fa 

0 

^ 

u 

^ 

0 

0 

u 

M 

rt 

'c3 

rt 

■rt 

13 

13 

"rt 

a 

S 

s 

S 

S 

S 

s 

1 

in 

G 

•  ri 

£5 

(U 

cis 

c?S 

=3 

3 

<o 

«u 

M 

ri^ 

,i<J 

j^ 

ji^ 

j^ 

M 

^H 

H  Z 

•$ 

•r" 

> 

^ 

^ 

^ 

^ 

^ 

H 

nJ 

£2 

tn 

a 

^ 

in 

rt 

rt 

rt 

(U 

<cls 

ids 

dj 

V 

S5 

M 

M 

>H 

u 

»-4 

M 

>-i 

>-l 

-< 

rt 

CIS 

n 

rt 

rt 

cJ 

rt 

ITS 

w 

C3 

c 

a 

(2 

P! 

C 

G 

c 

«■ 

1 

0 

0 

u 

u 

H 
tfl 

1— ( 

H 
<J 

hi 

u 

0 

> 

J2; 

< 

Q 

< 

0 

h-J 

o 


(U 


o 
,0 


o 
y 

tn 

o 


Nouns,  281 

writers  on  grammar  assign  an  objective  case  to  all  nouns  by 
a  kind  of  legal  fiction.  In  confining  the  distinction  of  cases, 
however,  to  those  for  which  there  are  distinct  forms,  we 
should  have  the  countenance  of  the  French,  Spaniards,  and 
Italians,  who  do  not  attribute  cases  to  their  nouns  merely 
because  pronouns  have  them.  Moreover,  when  English 
writers  treat  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  stage  of  our  language,  they 
assign  only  two  numbers  to  nouns,  although  the  personal 
pronouns  had  three ;  and  we  never  speak  of  the  number, 
gender,  or  case  of  adjectives  because  nouns  are  thus  dis- 
tinguished. 

If  then  nouns  have  two  case  forms,  one  denoting  posses- 
sion, and  the  other  used  in  common  in  all  other  relations, 
this  distinction  may,  and  does,  hold  good  for  both  the  singu- 
lar and  the  plural.  We  have  already  seen  the  various  forms 
of  the  common  case,  and  it  remains  only  to  consider  the 
possessive  in  both  numbers.  In  Anglo-Saxon  the  most  dis- 
tinctive, and  one  of  the  most  common  endings  of  the  posses- 
sive singular  was  -es,  and  gradually  all  the  other  forms  gave 
way  to  this  one,  so  that  there  is  not  now  a  noun  in  the 
language  that  forms  its  possessive  on  any  other  pattern.  At 
the  same  time  a  considerable  number  of  nouns  had  plurals 
in  -as  ;  and,  as  we  have  seen,  all  but  a  very  few  eventually 
adopted  that  style.  The  common  plural,  therefore,  and  pos- 
sessive singular  were  a  good  deal  alike  ;  and  in  the  very  lax 
spelling  that  prevailed  up  to  the  age  of  Elizabeth,  and  even 
later,  both  were  indiscriminately  made  with  -es^  -is,  -ys,  and  -s 
alone.  All  through  the  sixteenth  century  the  declension  of 
an  English  noun  was : 

Sing. — garden  Plur. — gardenes 

gardenes  gardenes 

except  that  instead  of  -es,  there  might  be  -is,  -ys,  or  •. 
When  the  common  case  ended  with  a  hissing  sound  the  ear 
could  seldom  distinguish  -es  or  -is  from  his,  and  that  crept 
into  use  as  a  fifth  form  of  the  possessive.  This  form  is  quite 
old,  being  found  a  number  of  times  in  the  second  manuscript 
of  Layamon's  "  Brut,"  second  half  of  the  thirteenth  century : 


282  English  Grammar. 

"he  was  Vther  his  sone." 
"  his  brode  sweord  he  vt  droh 
and  vppe  Colgrim  his  helm  smot." 

It  continued  in  use  down  to  the  eighteenth  century,  chiefly 
with  sibilants :  "  Hercules  his  club,"  "  Orpheus  his  lyre," 
"  Ulysses  his  dog,"  "  Phalaris  his  bull."  It  was  even  believed 
that  his  was  the  original,  of  which  the  shorter  forms  were 
only  corruptions.  In  the  135th  vS/>^f/^/^r  Addison  undertook 
to  tell  what  he  knew  about  English,  which  seems  to  have 
been  but  little ;  and  he  says  of  the  possessive  j  .• 

"I  might  here  observe  that  the  same  single  letter  on  many 
occasions  does  the  office  of  a  whole  word  and  expresses  the  his 
and  her  of  our  forefathers." 

In  the  absence  of  direct  evidence,  it  would  be  a  strange 
derivation  to  suppose  s  a  substitute  for  her ;  and  the  same 
reasoning  would  derive  it  from  their  in  "  children's  play." 
Even  admitting  these  to  be  blundering  imitations  of  his,  the 
question  remains :  Is  not  his  formed  from  he  by  adding  a 
possessive  s  ?  The  truth  is  that  throughout  the  Aryan 
family  s,  with  or  without  modifying  vowels,  is  one  of  the 
most  common  possessive  endings. 

In  versification  it  is  convenient  to  be  able  to  vary  the 
length  of  a  word  by  adding  or  omitting  a  syllable.  The 
omission  is  the  most  common,  and  syllables  already  feebly 
pronounced  are  the  victims.  Our  early  poets  wrote  in  full, 
and  trusted  to  the  ear  and  intelligence  of  the  reader  to  leave 
some  letters  and  syllables  unpronounced.  The  rhythm  might 
require  "  landes,"  for  example,  to  be  read  in  one  place  as 
two  syllables,  and  in  another  as  one.  At  length  writers  fell 
upon  the  expedient  of  omitting  silent  letters  and  marking 
their  place  with  the  sign  ( ' )  which  now  occurs  so  often  in 
our  poetry. 

"  But  I  must  leave  the  proofs  to  those  who  've  seen  'em," 

Byron. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  these  abbre- 
viations were  employed,  but  not  especially  to  denote  the 


Nouns.  283 

possessive  case,  but  rather  more  frequently  for  other  pur- 
poses : 

"  and  for  the  rest  o'  th'  fleet."    ' 

Shakesp.  :  "Tempest." 
"Your  Son  's  my  Father's  friend." 

**  Cymbeline," 
"  Loves  Labour  's  Lost." 

"  thou  hast  pared  thy  wit  o'  both  sides,  and  left  nothing  i'  th' 
middle. — "  Lear." 

The  following  examples  from  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  will  show 
how  the  plural  and  the  possessive  singular  were  expressed 
in  prose :  "  the  last  of  Jehu's  house  "  ;  "  Zachariahs  death  "  ; 
"  Uzziah's  life  "  ;  "  Uzziah  his  reign  "  ;  "  Menahem  his 
Raigne  "  ;  "  the  Painters  wives  Island  "  ;  "  Jesus  the  son 
of  Sirach  his  book  "  ;  "  Cato  his  family  "  ;  "  The  Scipio's 
marched  into  Thessaly  "  ;  "  The  ingratitude  of  Rome  to  the 
two  Scipio's  "  ;  "  Sibyls  verses  "  ;  "  in  Ahaz  time  "  ;  '*  Ahaz 
his  fourteenth  year  "  ;  "  ApoUoes  priests  "  ;  "  the  three  Ara- 
bia's "  ;  "  then  were  the  negro's  not  men."  This  way  of  ex- 
pressing the  plurals  of  words  ending  in  vowels  continued  for 
a  long  time.  Sir  Thomas  Browne,  in  his  "  Pseudodoxia  " 
(1650),  speaks  of  "  Several  sorts  of  torpedo's  "  ;  "  Hyaena's  " 
etc.,  of  "  feathers  brought  from  the  Molucca's  "  ;  of  "  Halo's  " 
and  "  Hydra's."  A  single  sentence  relative  to  the  standards 
of  the  Twelve  Tribes  will  illustrate  his  manner  of  expressing 
the  possessive  singular : 

"  But  Abenezra  and  others,  beside  the  colours  of  the  field,  do 
set  down  other  charges,  in  Reubens  the  form  of  a  man  or  man- 
drake, in  that  of  'y^udah  a  Lyon,  in  Ephraims  an  Ox,  in  Dan's  the 
figure  of  an  Aigle." 

I  have  observed  but  one  other  instance  of  the  modem 
possessive  in  the  whole  work. 

The  wits  of  Queen  Anne's  time  wrote  of  "  extraordinary 
genio's  "  {Tatler,  i/io);  "Voluptuous  concerts  of  Venus's 
and  Adonis's  {Censor,  April  20,  171 5);  and  of  the"  Hilpa's 
and  Nilpa's  that  lived  before  the  flood  "  {Spectator,  No.  609). 


284  English  Grammar. 

In  the  Philosophical  Transactions  for  1780  may  be  read: 
"  Vesuvius  does  not  exhibit  any  lava's  irregularly  crystal- 
ized,  and  forming  what  are  vulgarly  called  Giants  Cause- 
ways." Let  the  reader  here  observe  the  word  Giants.  The 
last  instance  of  this  kind  that  I  shall  cite  is  from  Gordon's 
"  History  of  American  Independence  "  (London,  1788)  :  "  It 
was  projected  and  brought  on  by  Messrs.  Otis's,  father  and 
son."  Thus  it  took  two  hundred  years  to  settle  the  single 
point,  that  John's  should  mean  belonging  to  John,  and 
should  mean  nothing  else. 

When  a  word  ends  with  any  sound  of  s,  the  addition  of 
another  will  sometimes  produce  an  excessive  and  unpleasant 
hissing.  Most  readers  will  agree  with  me  that  "  Moses's 
serpent  "  "  and  Caucasus's  hard  rock  "  {Spectator,  Nos.  14 
and  61 1),  Ulysses's  shipwreck  and  righteousness's  sake,  are 
far  too  sibilant ;  but  there  is  a  wide  diversity  of  opinion 
as  to  the  proper  limit.  Usage  differs ;  and  in  such  a  case 
usage  is  the  law.  The  Bible  has  "  Moses'  hands,"  "  Jesus' 
disciple,"  for  "  righteousness'  sake,"  "  asking  no  questions 
for  conscience'  sake  "  ;  the  Spectator  (135)  speaks  of  "  Hudi- 
bras  doggrel  expressions,"  and  '*  St.  James'  Garden  Hill 
Church."  In  Oliphant's  "  New  English "  we  find  such 
phrases  as  "  Stubbes'  remarks,"  "  Erasmus  Greek  Testa- 
ment," "  Ellis'  Letters,"  and  "  Monkbarns'  lykewake."  On 
the  other  hand  I  have  met  with  "  Jesus's  "  in  two  quite 
respectable  and  very  recent  publications. 

Out  of  the  chaos  we  may  deduce  the  following  general 
conclusions : 

1.  As  'j  is  now  the  sign  of  the  possessive,  presumption  is 
always  in  its  favor,  until  a  reason  can  be  shown  for  its  omis- 
sion. That  reason  can  only  be  that  too  many  sibilants  are 
difficult  to  utter  or  unpleasant  to  hear. 

2.  The  longer  the  word  the  more  cumbersome  the  addition 
is  felt  to  be. 

3.  Add  the  'j  to  all  words  of  one  syllable. 

"  The  vera  topmost  tow'ring  height 
O  Miss's  bonnet." 

Burns. 


Nouns.  285 

"Binding  his  foal  unto  the  vine,  and  his  ass's  colt  unto  the 
choice  vine." — Bible. 

4.  To  words  of  more  than  one  syllable  do  not  add  'j,  if  it 
would  make  three  sibilants  close  together. 

5.  In  no  case  add  's  to  words  of  more  than  three  syllables, 
so  as  to  make  Semiramis's  or  Telemachus's. 

6.  Most  words  of  two  syllables,  not  having  two  sibilants  near 
the  end,  will  bear  the  addition  of  's — Thomas,  Morris,  Ellis, 
Peters,  Sickles.  If  the  last  syllable  be  accented  it  will  bear 
the  addition — Hortense,  Delmas,  Dundas,  Fordyce,  Laplace, 
Maclise,  Pelouze.  If  the  last  syllable  be  of  considerable  vol- 
ume, but  unaccented — Greatrakes,  Helmholtz,  Leibnitz,  Monk- 
barns — the  'j  will  generally  be  omitted. 

7.  Words  of  three  syllables  will  rarely  bear  's,  unless  the 
last  have  a  principal  or  secondary  accent — Boniface,  Espi- 
nasse,  Halifax,  Palafox. 

8.  The  termination  will  often  be  added  to  words  that  end 
in  -ce  or  -x  when  it  would  be  omitted  if  the  terminal  sound 
were  represented  by  s. 

9.  The  above  principles  apply  when  both  the  possessor 
and  the  thing  possessed  are  named  ;  but  if  only  the  former, 
the  termination  is  added  or  the  expression  changed — This  is 
Carrothers'  house,  whose  is  that  ?     It  is  Quackenbos's. 

Compound  terms  form  their  plurals  by  adding  s  to  the 
principal  part,  but  their  possessives  by  adding  it  to  the 
last  part — plural,  sons-in-law,  possessive,  son-in-law  s.  This  is 
admissible  even  when  the  expression  is  of  considerable 
length,  as,  the  postmaster  of  Columbia,  South  Carolina's  son. 
When  that  becomes  too  unwieldy,  the  only  resource,  as  in 
many  other  cases,  is  to  change  the  expression.  When  to  a 
first  noun  a  second,  meaning  the  same  person  or  thing, 
is  added,  as  if  to  make  identification  sure,  both  should  have 
the  possessive  sign. 

"A  small  and  old  spaniel,  which  had  been  Don  J^ose's,  his 
father's." — Byron. 

When  several  different  persons  or  things  sustain  the  pos- 
sessive relation,  it  should  be  shown  equally  for  all. 


286  English  Grafnmar. 

"  For  honour's,  pride's,  religion's,  virtue's  sake." — Id. 

But  conflicting  and  less  correct  examples  are  not  wanting. 
Captain  Smith  called  Pocahontas  "  ^Ae  Kings  daughter  of 
Virginia^     We  also  read  : 

"  The  king's  daughter  of  the  south  shall  come  to  the  king  of 
the  north  to  make  an  agreement." — Daniel  xi.,  6.  "  I  left  the 
parcel  at  Mr.  Johnson's  the  bookseller." — Crombie's  Grammar. 
"  The  psalms  are  David's,  the  king,  priest,  and  prophet  of  the 
Jewish  people." — Lindley  Murray. 

"  And  Otway,  Radcliffe,  Schiller,  Shakespeare's  art 
Had  stamped  her  image  in  me." — "Childe  Harold,"  iv.,  i8. 

Yet  when  two  or  more  names  are  closely  associated,  as 
in  a  business  firm,  they  require  but  one  possessive  sign — 
Call  at  Smith  &  Ward 's  office. 

A  substitute  for  the  possessive  case  may  be  formed  with 
the  preposition  of. — His  father  s  house  and  the  house  of  his 
father  are  the  same  in  fact  but  not  the  same  grammatically. 
The  latter  is  not  a  case  or  we  should  with  equal  reason  have 
as  many  cases  as  we  can  find  prepositions.  The  possessive 
case  is  commonly,  not  invariably,  used  in  speaking  of  human 
beings,  the  preposition  when  we  speak  of  inanimate  things 
— the  boys  skates,  the  judge's  carriage,  the  bend  of  the  river, 
the  shade  of  the  oak.  The  two  forms  are  used  of  animals 
with  almost  equal  frequency. 

Thus  far  I  have  spoken  only  of  the  possessive  singular. 
The  plural  bafifled  the  ingenuity  of  grammarians  for  a  con- 
siderable time.  Where  the  plural  did  not  end  in  s  there 
was  little  difficulty  ;  men's  work  and  children's  play  afforded 
an  easy  solution.  But  when  the  plural  was  formed  by  affix- 
ing an  s,  it  was  not  deemed  desirable  to  add  another.  John 
Wallis  suggested  "the  Lord's  House''  and  "the  Common's 
House  "  for  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament,  explaining  that 
these  were  intended  as  abbreviations  for  "  the  Lords' s  House  " 
and  the  Commons's  House" ;  but  the  absurdity  of  these  forms, 
which  were  precisely  like  singulars,  prevented  their  general 
acceptance.     Yet  something  of  the  kind  may  be  met  with 


Nouns.  287 

occasionally.  Thus  an  article  on  the  cuckoo,  in  the  Philo- 
sophical Transactions  for  1788,  speaks  of  the  eggs  ^^  found 
in  Titlark's  nests  "/  yet  in  general  usage  and  in  treatises  on 
grammar  the  plural  was  left  without  distinction  of  case. 
Gordon's  "  History  of  American  Independence,"  above 
cited,  has  the  following : 

"  They  retired  from  their  own  to  neighbours  houses.  *  *  * 
The  troops  began  landing  under  cover  of  the  ships  cannons. 
*  *  *  It  was  with  no  small  indignation  that  the  people  beheld 
the  representatives  chamber,  court-house  and  Faneuil-hall  occu- 
pied by  troops." 

The  "British  Grammar"  (1784)  says  that  the  plural  in  s 
has  no  genitive ;  and  a  "  Grammar  of  the  English  Tongue," 
by  Thomas  Coar,  so  late  as  1796,  has  still  no  way  of  distin- 
guishing the  genitive  case.  Yet  it  is  certain  that  before  the 
last-named  date  the  present  method  of  distinguishing  the 
possessive  plural,  by  putting  (')  after  the  s  had  been 
devised.  The  earliest  instances  I  have  met  with  are  two 
passages  in  the  Gentleman  s  Magazine  for  January,  1788  : 

"  I  should  be  very  glad  of  some  of  your  correspondents*  opinion.'* 
"  and  consequently  instead  of  being  circulated  through  all  the 

learned  part  of  Europe,  must  be  confined  to  the  perusal  of  feeble 

amateurs,  or  ladies'  maids." 

If  the  common  plural  ends  with  .$■,  place  an  apostrophe  (') 
after  it — sailors  rights  ;  if  the  plural  does  not  end  in  s,  add 
V — freemen's  rights. 

PERSON. 

The  distinction  oi person  is  threefold.  The  first  person  is 
the  speaker  ;  the  second  the  person  spoken  to  ;  the  third  any 
one  else.  The  distinction  is  better  shown  by  the  personal 
pronouns,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred.  All  nouns  are  of 
the  third  person,  except  when  associated  with  the  pronoun 
of  the  first  person  or  are  appellations  of  persons  directly 
addressed. 


CHAPTER  III. 
ADJECTIVES. 

The  name,  from  the  Latin  adjectivus,  added  or  thrown  to, 
gives  no  idea  of  the  nature  and  use  of  the  words  so  desig- 
nated ;  but,  being  well  established,  it  has  become  a  conven- 
ient term.  We  may  suppose  that  the  first  generations  of 
speaking  men  began  by  distinguishing  things — animals,  trees, 
plants, — and  the  conspicuous  actions  of  some.  They  might 
next  observe  qualities  in  which  one  differed  from  another. 
Animals  were  large  or  small,  swift  or  slow  ;  grass  vfa.s  green, 
while  some  blossoms  were  white  and  others  red ;  some  fruits 
were  sweet,  more  were  sour,  and  a  few  bitter.  Whether 
derived  from  the  more  essential  parts  of  speech  or  wholly 
original  sounds  we  cannot  possibly  know,  but  the  former  is 
the  more  natural  supposition. 

These  words  are  of  only  secondary  importance.  While 
we  can  scarcely  express  any  meaning  without  nouns  and 
verbs,  much  may  be  said  without  mentioning  qualities,  good 
or  bad.  The  first  chapter  of  Matthew  contains  474  words, 
of  which,  at  the  utmost,  only  five — quite  as  properly  only 
three — are  adjectives.  If  that  be  thought  an  extreme  case, 
in  the  first  twenty-two  verses  of  John's  Gospel — 393  words — 
there  is  only  one  adjective,  and  that  a  monosyllable.  Again, 
if  I  utter  the  word  horse,  some  conception  or  picture  of  the 
animal  rises  at  once  in  the  active  mind  of  the  hearer  ;  but  if 
I  say  tall,  no  mental  picture  is  formed,  for  the  word  may  be 
applied  equally  to  grass,  a  man,  a  tree,  or  a  steeple — to  one 
thing,  or  to  many. 

We  have  often  seen  already  that  every  usage  in  language 
begins  at  a  certain  point,  from  which  it  spreads,  and  that  in 

288 


Adjectives.  289 

its  diffusion  the  point  of  departure  is  apt  to  be  lost  sight  of. 
Words  expressing  no  quality,  but  relations  of  time,  place, 
origin,  order — daily,  annual,  recent,  adjacent,  distant,  Irish, 
foremost,  central,  hindmost — are  used  with  nouns,  like  the 
primitive  adjectives,  and  are  classified  with  them.  As  adjec- 
tives have  so  little  independent  existence,  they  are  pecul- 
iarly apt  to  be  derived  from  words  of  other  classes.  In  this 
respect  they  may  be  distinguished  somewhat  in  the  following 
manner  : 

1.  Primary  adjectives,  native,  or  of  foreign  origin,  which 
are  not  obviously  traceable  to  any  other  words — acute,  bold, 
cruel,  deaf,  early,  free,  good,  hard,  idle,  etc. 

2.  Adjectives  derived  from  nouns. 

a.  From  nouns,-  mostly  English,  by  adding  the  native 
suffixes,  -ed,  -en,  -fast,  -ful,  -ish,  -less,  -ly,  -some,  -ward,  -y  or 
-ey — horned,  ragged,  tented,  earthen,  leaden,  wooden,  earth- 
fast,  shamefast,  steadfast,  shameful,  tearful,  truthful,  child- 
ish, English,  waspish,  fatherless,  homeless,  shoeless,  godly, 
motherly,  shapely,  handsome,  toilsome,  homeward,  wayward, 
windward,  clayey,  sandy,  stony,  woody. 

Note, — Adjectives  in  -ed  seem  to  be  formed  in  imitation 
of  participles.  A  man  who  has  learned  is  a  learned  man, 
and  one  who  has  been  armed,  or  furnished  with  arms,  is  an 
armed  man.  Next,  a  beast  furnished  by  nature  with  horns 
is  a  horned  beast,  and  finally  we  have  such  words  as  long- 
Jiaired,  four-footed,  left-handed,  tongue-tied,  evidently  not 
participles  of  any  verbs.  It  is  impossible  to  draw  the  line 
accurately  between  adjectives  and  participles,  but  we  can 
come  near  it  by  calling  those  adjectives  that  cannot  be 
traced  to  verbs. 

The  ending  -some  has  no  connection  with  the  adjective- 
pronoun  some,  but  is  related  to  same,  expressing  identity 
or  likeness :  German  langsam,  Scotch  langsome,  slow ;  Ice- 
landic frith-samr,  peaceful. 

b.  Adjectives  formed  from  nouns  by  means  of  suffixes, 
changed  or  unchanged,  from  French,  Latin,  or  Greek — 
-able  or  -ible,  -aceous,  -al,  -alian,  -an,  -ar,  -arian,  -ary,  -ate,  -eel, 

-eous,  ese,  -esque,  -ian,  -ic,  -il,  -He,  ine,  -ive,  -le,  -lent,  -aid,  -ory^ 

19 


290  English  Grammar. 

-ose,  -ous — marketable,  peaceable,  contemptible,  responsible, 
amylaceous,  sebaceous,  moral,  mortal,  radical,  bacchanalian. 
Episcopalian,  diocesan,  Franciscan,  columnar,  ocular,  parlia- 
mentarian, vegetarian,  Trinitarian,  Unitarian,  military,  tribu- 
tary, ovate,  palmate,  genteel,  igneous,  vitreous,  Chinese,  Maltese, 
picturesque,  Romanesque,  Christian,  Darwinian,  Parisian, 
angelic,  volcanic,  civil,  gentile,  hostile,  servile,  canine,  feminine, 
sanguine,  festive, plaintive,  gentle,  corpulent,  turbulent,  fungoid, 
pithecoid,  sphenoid,  mandatory,  migratory,  globose,  operose, 
varicose,  disastrous,  necessitous. 

Note. — The  ending  -arian  is  really  a  double  adjective 
ending.  Although  we  have  not  the  simple  forms  trinitary 
and  vegetary,  unitary  is  met  with,  and  parliamentary  is 
quite  common.  The  same  is  true  of  -alian,  and  there  are 
several  other  double  endings,  as  in  merit-ori-ous,  paradox-ic-al, 
symmetr-ic-al. 

3.  Adjectives  are  formed  upon  other  adjectives — old-en, 
hard-y,  clean-ly,  good-ly,  kind-ly,  dark-some,  lone-some,  weari- 
some, whole-some,  robust-ious.  This  last  word  is  not  com- 
mendable, but  is  sanctioned  by  "  Hamlet,"  and  Benton's 
"  Thirty  Years  in  the  Senate." 

4.  Adjectives  are  made  from  verbs  by  adding  -able,  -ant, 
-ary,  -astic,  -ate,  -atory,  -bund,  -ent,  -ible,  -He,  -ite,  -ive,  -ory, 
-uble — blamable,  pardonable,  jubilant,  rampant,  intercalary, 
sedentary,  drastic,  spastic,  considerate,  moderate,  derogatory, 
migratory,  moribund,  dependent,  deficient,  pertinent,  fusible, 
legible,  ductile,  facile,  pensile,  erudite,  recondite,  cursive,  mis- 
sive, persuasive,  accessory,  promissory,  soluble,  voluble. 

Note. — Those  that  end  in  -ant,  -ent,  -ate,  and  -ite  are  modifi- 
cations of  participles. 

5.  A  few  are  formed  from  adverbs  and  prepositions,  such 
as  aftermost,  anterior,  contrary,  exterior,  former,  foremost, 
further,  hinder,  inferior,  inner,  interior,  nether,  outer  ox  utter, 
prior,  superior,  thorough,  upper. 

6.  Nearly  every  verb  in  the  language  furnishes  two  parti- 
ciples that  may  be  used  as  adjectives — running  water,  a 
graven  image,  a  ploughed  field. 


Adjectives.  291 

7.  Some  adverbs,  especially  those  ending  in  ward — back- 
ward^ forivard,  downward,  homeward — may  be  used  as 
adjectives. 

8.  The  greater  number  of  adjectives  may  have  their  sig- 
nification reversed  by  prefixing  the  negative  dis-,  un-,  in-,  or 
non-,  thus  nearly  doubling  their  number. 

9.  Expressions  having  the  force  of  adjectives  are  formed 
by  combining  two  or  more  words — water-proof,  star-spangled 
rock-ribbed,  pepper-andsalt-colored.  There  is  no  limit  to  the 
descriptive  phrases  that  may  be  made  in  this  way,  and  some 
are  of  considerable  length,  as  much-to-be-lamented,  never-to-be- 
forgotten.  They  are  equally  adjective  phrases  whether  the 
parts  be  united  by  hyphens  or  not.  The  German  language 
is  capable  of  using  descriptions  containing  a  dozen  words  or 
more  in  the  manner  of  adjectives  ;  but  in  English  such  com- 
binations have  a  burlesque  appearance  : 

"  and  there 
With  an  J-turn-the-crank-of -the- Universe  air, 
And  a  tone  which,  at  least  to  my  fancy,  appears 
To  be  not  so  much  entering  as  boxing  your  ears." 

James  Russell  Lowell. 

10.  Lastly  almost  any  noun  may,  without  alteration,  be 
used  as  an  adjective — a  stone  wall,  a  gold  watch,  an  iron 
chain.  Two  or  more  nouns  may  be  used  together  for  this 
purpose — a  bear-skin  cap,  a  birch-bark  canoe.  In  the  ofifice 
of  the  Register  of  the  Treasury  in  Washington  is  a  paper, 
pertaining  to  accounts  of  the  Garfield  Memorial  Hospital 
in  which  is  an  item  of  a  "  hand  hole  cover  bolt.  Each 
word  except  the  last  serves  as  an  adjective  to  the  one 
that  follows. 

Thus  our  language  has  an  unlimited  power  of  producing  a 
class  of  words  that  careful  persons  use  but  sparingly.  When- 
ever it  becomes  necessary  to  employ  several  adjectives, 
variety  of  expression  can  be  secured  by  drawing  from  the 
various  sources  here  enumerated. 


292  English  Grammar. 

The  adjective  is  often  equivalent  to  the  genitive  or  pos- 
sessive case,  denoting  possession  or  derivation  : 

a  mother's  love  maternal  affection 

cares  of  a  household  domestic  cares 

the  armies  of  France  the  French  armies 

the  election  of  a  President  the  Presidential  election 

In  most  languages  adjectives  have  the  same  apparatus  as 
nouns  of  terminations  to  denote  gender,  number,  and  case. 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  any  sufficient  reason  for  this.  We  are 
left  to  conjecture  that,  being  used  mostly  along  with  nouns, 
the  terminations  of  the  one  class  were  extended  to  the  other, 
as  (speaking  metaphorically)  electricity  or  magnetism  is  im- 
parted by  induction,  or  as  high-colored  flowers  impart  some- 
thing of  their  bright  dyes  to  pale  ones.  This  machinery, 
wanting  in  English,  renders  adjectives  more  available  for 
use  in  the  place  of  nouns.  The  only  trace  we  have  of  this 
declension  is  the  plural  forms  of  a  few  when  used  as  nouns : 

1.  National,  tribal,  or  partisan  designations — Greeks, 
Romans,  Spartans,  Italians,  Americans,  Christians,  Ma- 
hometans, Arians,  Socinians,  Puritans,  Republicans,  Stoics, 
vegetarians. 

Note. — If  the  word  end  with  a  sibilant,  s  is  not  added. 

2.  Various  designations  of  classes  of  persons — ancients, 
moderns,  innocents,  mortals,  natives,  nobles,  sages,  criminals, 
heathens,  pagans,  blacks,  whites. 

To  these  may  be  added  a  number  used  as  nouns  only  in 
what  is  called  the  comparative  degree — of  which  hereafter — 
betters,  elders,  inferiors,  superiors,  seniors,  juniors. 

3.  Collective  terms  for  various  pursuits,  studies,  or 
branches  of  science — ethics,  acoustics,  metaphysics,  mne- 
monics, hydrostatics,  quadratics,  politics. 

4.  Terms  descriptive  of  large  classes  or  groups  of  things 
— combustibles,  eatables,  goods,  7iarcotics,  opiates,  sudorifics, 
bitters,  woollens,  greens,  canonicals,  vitals. 

The  reader  who  cares  to  see  how  an  adjective  may  be 
spread  out  according  to  number,  gender,  and  case,  can 
glance  at  the  following  Sanskrit  declension  : 


Adjectives, 


293 


SINGULAR 

Masculine, 

Feminine. 

Neuter, 

Vocative 

papa 

pape 

papa 

Nominative 

papas 

papa 

papam 

Accusative 

papam 

papam 

papam 

Instrumental  papena 

papaya 

papena 

Dative 

papaya 

papayai 

papaya 

Ablative 

papat 

papayas 

papat 

Genitive 

papasya 

papayas 

papasya 

Locative 

pap^ 

papayam 

pap^ 

DUAL 

Voc. 

papau 

pap^ 

pape 

NOM. 

papau 

pap6. 

pape 

Ace. 

papau 

pap6 

pape 

Inst. 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

Dat. 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

Abl. 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

papabhyam 

Gen. 

papayos 

papayos 

papayos 

Loc. 

papayos 

papayos 

papayos 

PLURAL 

Voc. 

papas 

papas 

papani 

NOM. 

papas 

papas 

papani 

Ace. 

papan 

papas 

papani 

Inst. 

pSpais 

papabhis 

papais 

Dat. 

papebhyas 

papabhyas 

papebhyas 

Abl. 

papebhyas 

papabhyas 

papebhyas 

Gen. 

papanam 

papanam 

papanam 

Loc. 

papeshu 

papasu 

papeshu 

All  that  we  have  as  the  equivalent  of  this  array  is  the  small 
unchanging  word  bad.  It  will  be  observed  too  that  while 
there  are  seventy-two  distinctions  in  the  combinations  of 
number,  gender,  and  case,  there  are  only  twenty-six  separate 
forms ;  and  this  holds  good  of  all  inflected  languages. 
They  never  have  forms  enough  to  go  round.  From  an 
inflectional  table  of  seventy-two  places  we  are  not  to  sup- 


294 


English  Grammar, 


pose  that  the  change  to  one  simple  monosyllable  was  made 
at  a  single  step ;  but  to  attempt  to  trace  the  gradual  wear- 
ing down  would  be  too  tedious.  Only  one  intermediate 
point  shall  be  noticed.  Our  Anglo-Saxon  fathers  declined 
the  adjective  good  thus : 


SINGULAR 

Masculine.  Feminine. 


Neuter 


NOM. 

goda 

g6de 

gode 

Gen. 

godan 

godan 

godan 

Dat. 

gddan 

g6dan 

godan 

Ace. 

gddan 

godan 
plural 

gode 

NOM. 

g6dan 

g6dan 

g6dan 

Gen. 

g6dena 

g6dena 

g6dena 

Dat. 

g6dum 

godum 

godum 

Ace. 

g6dan 

gddan 

godan 

The  seventy-two  places  are  here  reduced  to  twenty-four, 
and  the  forms  that  are  to  occupy  them  are  only  five.  In 
the  Sanskrit  example  the  inflectional  forms  were  thirty-six 
per  cent,  of  those  theoretically  required,  in  the  Saxon  less 
than  twenty-one.  The  Saxon  declension  took  another 
pattern,  slightly  fuller  when  the  definite  article  preceded 
the  adjective. 

Although  our  adjectives  dispense  with  distinctions  of 
gender,  number,  and  case,  they  need  and  have  distinctions 
of  a  different  kind.  As  they  primarily  express  qualities  it  is 
often  necessary  to  show  which  of  two  or  more  possess  a 
quality  in  the  highest  degree.  One  man  may  be  strong, 
another  strong-er,  and  yet  another  the  strong-est  of  the  three. 
These  distinctions  are  called  degrees.  The  first  is  called  the 
positive,  the  second  the  comparative,  and  the  last  the  super- 
lative. The  orderly  exhibition  of  these  three  degrees  is 
called  comparison. 

When  an  adjective  ends  with  e,  one  vowel  can  be 
dropped. 


Adjectives,  295 


free 

free-r 

free-st 

white 

white-r 

white-st 

able 

able-r 

able-st 

It  is  not  meant  to  indicate  here  whether  it  is  the  last 
letter  of  the  positive  or  the  first  of  the  sufifix  that  is 
omitted.  It  is  a  point  of  no  practical  importance,  but 
the  earlier  usages  of  the  language  countenance  the  division 
given  here. 

All  adjectives  of  one  syllable  are  compared  in  this  man- 
ner; also  dissyllables  with  ultimate  accent,  or  whose  last 
syllable  has  no  other  vowel  than  a  final  y  ox  ^  final  e 
preceded  by  /.     The  final  y  of  course  becomes  /'. 


genteel 

genteel-er 

genteel-est 

complete 

complete-r 

complete-st 

gentle 

gentle-r 

gentle-st 

worthy 

worthi-er 

worthi-est 

All  other  adjectives  may  take  these  terminations  so  long  as 
the  result  is  easy  for  the  tongue  and  pleasing  to  the  ear, 
which  in  all  such  cases  is  the  ultimate  test.  More  than  a 
law,  it  is  the  reason  of  the  law.  Soberest  and  honester  will 
do  very  well,  but  soberer  and  honestest  are  inadmissible. 
Writers  of  the  present  day  are  far  from  agreed  as  to  what 
words  admit  of  this  comparison,  and  our  ancestors  indulged 
in  still  greater  latitude.  Such  words  as  fitting-est,  cunning- 
esty  certain-er,  tender-er,  faithfull-est,  delight full-est^  wonder- 
full-est,  may  be  found  in  authors  of  the  highest  repute ;  and 
the  readers  of  Carlyle  will  recall  his  favorite  word  of  praise, 
beautifullest.  When  these  terminations  would  render  the 
word  unwieldy,  substitutes  are  found  in  the  adverbs,  more 
and  mosty  in  imitation  of  the  French  : 

eloquent  more  eloquent  most  eloquent 

The  use  of  -er  and  -est  may  be  called  the  native  or  Anglo- 
Saxon  comparison,  and  has  a  pedigree  longer  than  any 
princely  house.  In  Sanskrit  there  were  two  regular  modes 
of  comparison.     One  added  -lyas  for  the  comparative  and 


296  English  Grammar. 

-ishta  for  the  superlative  :  the  other  added  -tara  and  -iatna. 
We  may  call  the  first  the  old  comparison.  In  the  oldest 
remains  it  was  unfrequent  and  on  the  decrease.  The  latter 
and  more  common  we  may  call  the  new  comparison.  All 
the  other  Aryan  families  exhibit  remains  of  these  termina- 
tions more  or  less  fragmentary  and  mismatched.  The  Zend 
is  said  to  have  had  them  nearly  as  in  Sanskrit ;  but  of  that 
I  do  not  know.  Greek  retains  representatives  of  both 
systems : 

kales  kail-ion  kall-isto-s 

leptos  lepto-tero-s  lepto-tato-s 

In  the  last  a  /  is  found  in  the  place  of  m,  the  original  com- 
mon to  both  languages  having  probably  been  mt.  Latin 
did  not  preserve  these  suffixes  so  well ;  and  retained  the  old 
comparative  and  new  superlative  in  a  much  altered  con- 
dition. 

viridis  virid-ius  virid-issimus 

longus  long-ius  long-issimus 

Here  I  take  the  termination  -ius,  or  rather  -ios  to  be  more 
primitive  than  -ior,  as  an  earlier  s  is  well  known  to  be  often 
converted  into  a  later  r.  I  can  only  conjecture  the  ss  of  the 
superlative  to  have  taken  the  place  of  /,  a  substitution  of 
which  there  are  many  examples.  The  superlative  termina- 
tion is  rather  better  preserved  in  such  forms  as  opt-imu-s, 
ult-imu-Sy  from  which,  however,  one  t  has  still  been  dropped. 
As  representatives  of  the  Slavonic  branch  Russian  and  Polish 
are  almost  entirely  without  separate  terminations  for  the 
superlative,  but  form  comparatives  on  the  older  pattern,  the 
former  adding  ai-ishii  aishii,  or  merely  shii,  and  the  latter 
jejszy,  which  are  nearly  the  same  to  the  ear.  There  are 
only  four  Russian  superlatives  : 


COMP. 

SUPERL. 

velikii 

(great) 

bol-shii 

velicha-ishii 

malwi 

(little) 

men-shii 

mal-aishii 

vwisokii 

(high) 

vis-shii 

vwisocha-ishii 

nizkii 

(low) 

niz-shii 

nizha-ishii 

Adjectives.  297 

in  which  the  endings  are  clearly  the  same,  and  the  superla- 
tives are  developed  from  the  comparatives.  All  other 
superlatives  are  made  by  placing  vsakh  (of  all)  before  the 
positive.  Lithuanian  has  only  a  comparative  formed  on  the 
older  pattern.  The  Irish,  the  best  preserved  of  the  Celtic 
stock,  has  a  comparative  ending  in  -nios^  and  no  separate 
superlative. 

Coming  now  to  our  own  more  immediate  kindred,  the 
Goths  distinguished  the  comparative  by  adding  -is  or  -os^ 
according  to  the  other  elements  with  which  they  were  asso- 
ciated. This  termination  was  evidently  akin  to  the  Sanskrit 
-lyas  and  the  Latin  -is  in  mag-is.  When  a  termination  was 
added  to  denote  number,  gender,  etc.,  s  became  z.  The 
Sansk.  superlative  -ish-ta  was  represented  in  Gothic  by  -is-ta 
or  -os-ta  ;  and  here  the  .$•  held  its  place  by  the  help  of  the  t. 
Hence  an  adjective  ran  thus  : 

COMP.  SUPERL. 

blind-s     (blind)  blind-oz-a  blind-os-ta 

haugh-s   (high)  haugh-iz-a  haugh-is-ta 

Now  the  tendency  called  rhotacism  turned  the  z  into  r  in 
all  the  other  Teutonic  languages  ;  and  that  is  how  we  come 
to  say  blind-er,  blind-est  instead  of  blind-ez,  blind-est. 

Grimm,  Bopp,  and  others  hold  that  the  superlative  is 
always  formed  by  adding  to  the  comparative,  and  conse- 
quently is  later  in  time,  and  that,  if  in  any  language  one  of 
the  two  is  wanting,  it  is  the  superlative. 

Putting  these  fragmentary  hints  together,  we  may,  from 
the  mere  comparison  of  adjectives,  infer  that  the  Aryans  of 
Europe  left  their  ancestral  homes  on  the  streams  that  supply 
the  Caspian  at  different  times ;  that  the  Celts  and  Lithua- 
nians set  out  before  the  comparison  in  -tara  and  -tama  had 
come  into  common  use,  or  any  form  for  the  superlative ; 
that  the  Slavic  emigration  came  next ;  and  that  our  Teutonic 
ancestors  learned  only  the  pattern  that  was  falling  into  dis- 
use when  the  literature  of  India  began.  What  we  call  the 
ancient  Greeks,  then,  seem  to  be  comparatively  late  arrivals, 
while  our  brethren  of  Tipperary  belong  to  the  oldest  branch 


298  English  Grammar. 

of  the  family,  and  those  who  had  conquered  and  colonized 
India  before  Solomon  sent  forth  his  navies  for  algum-trees, 
ivory,  apes,  and  peacocks,  are  the  youngest. 

The  terminations  -tara  and  -tania  have  reached  Western 
Europe  in  connection  with  pronouns  and  prepositions  rather 
than  adjectives  of  quality.  Bopp  holds  that  -tama  is  a 
contraction  from  -tara-ma  on  the  general  principle  that  the 
superlative  is  always  a  further  development  of  the  compara- 
tive. It  is  held  with  still  more  confidence  that  -tara  signifies 
of  two,  and  -tama,  of  several.  Thus  from  the  Sanskrit  inter- 
rogative ka  were  formed  ka-tara-s,  which  of  the  two  ?  and 
ka-tama-s,  which  of  several  ?  In  like  manner,  from  the  rela- 
tive/«  were  rwdide  ya-iar as,  and  j/a-tama-s,  and  so  of  several 
others.  Taking  ka,  ka-tara-s,  ka-tama-s  as  an  example  of  all 
words  formed  in  this  manner,  I  observe  that  k  is  represented 
in  Greek  by  k,  p,  in  Latin  by  c,  qu,  in  Gothic  and  Anglo- 
Saxon  by  h,  hw,  in  English  by  h,  wh.  We  have  then,  cor- 
responding to  the  Sansk.  ka-tara-s,  Gr.  no-repo-?,  which  of 
the  two  ?  Sansk.  e-ka-tara-s,  Gr.  e-xa-rspo-?,  each  of  the  two ; 
Lat.  uter  (initial  wanting);  Lith.  ka-tra-s ;  Russ.  ko-torw-i, 
which  ;  Goth,  hwa-thar  ;  A.-S.  hwae-ther  ;   Eng.  whether  : 

"The  governor  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Whether  of  the 
twain  will  ye  that  I  release  unto  you  ?" — Matt,  xxvii.,  21, 

There  are  many  other  words  in  the  different  European 
languages  formed  by  affixing  these  terminations  to  pronouns, 
prepositions,  or  adverbs,  and  all  including  the  idea  of  duality. 
We  may  instance  in  English  either,  neither,  other,  dexter, 
sinister.  Interior,  exterior,  ulterior  are  double  comparatives. 
Extreme — Lat.  extremus — adds  a  superlative  to  a  compara- 
tive ending,  and  is  an  apt  illustration  of  Bopp's  conjecture 
cited  above.  When  Addison  wrote  of  "  the  sea's  extremest 
borders"  he  probably  did  not  know  that  he  had  heaped 
three  terminations  together. 

In  words  like  ul-tima-te  there  is  a  relic  of  the  ancient 
'tama,  or  at  least  of  the  latter  part  of  it,  that  comes  to  us 
through  the  Latin  ;  but  thereare  many  traces  of  it  not  thus 
borrowed.  These  further  strengthen  the  supposition  that 
the  superlative  -ma  was  a  separate  element.    The  Gothic 


Adjectives. 


299 


\iaAfrii-ma,  first  or  foremost,  afte-ma,  last ;  and  Anglo-Saxon 
had: 


for-ma  fore-most 

hinde-ma  hind-most 

inne-ma  in-most 

mide-ma  mid-most 


nithe-ma     neth-most   or   nether- 
most 
ufe-ma        up-most,  upper-most 
ute-ma         ut-most 


A  double  superlative  ending  -st  was  added  while  Anglo- 
Saxon  was  yet  in  use,  which  gradually  led  to  the  belief  that 
these  words  were  made  up  by  adding  the  adverb  most. 
Even  triple  endings  are  not  wanting : 

"  and  behold  we  are  in  Kadesh,  a  city  in  the  ut-ter-mo-st  of  thy 
borders." — Num.  xx.,  16. 

A  few  adjectives  are  marked  by  certain  irregularities  of 
comparison.  Especially  are  there  a  number  of  superlatives 
made  by  adding  most  and  originating  in  the  misapprehension 
just  noticed. 


aft 

after 

aftermost 

far 

farther 

farthest 

fore 

further 

furthest,  furthermost 

fore 

fonner 

foremost,  first 

hind 

hinder 

hindmost 

late 

later,  latter 

latest,  last 

The  irregularity  of  farther  and  farthest  is  the  inserting  of 
th  in  imitation  oi  further  a-nd  furthest. 

A  few  comparatives  and  superlatives  have  nouns,  prepo- 
sitions, or  adverbs  as  their  positives. 

inmost,  innermost 

utmost,  uttermost,  outermost 

uppermost 

sternmost 

headmost 

topmost 

northmost 

southmost,  etc.,  etc. 

Some  are  made  up  from  fragments  of  different  adjectives, 
Osgood,  better,  best,  bad,  worse,  worst ;  but  it  will  be  well  to 
treat  these  and  remaining  irregularities  singly. 


in 

inner 

out 

outer,  utter 

up 

upper 

stern 

head 

top 

north 

south 

300  English  Grammar. 

Bad — a  word  of  rather  uncertain  origin.  It  stands  quite 
alone,  and  the  comparative  and  superlative,  worse  and  worst, 
are  from  a  different  source.  Worse  is  one  of  the  most  per- 
plexing words  in  our  language,  the  doubt  being  whether  it 
is  a  positive,  a  comparative,  or  a  double  comparative.  The 
most  plausible  explanation  is  that  it  is  originally  and  strictly 
a  positive,  from  a  Teutonic  root  wars,  to  distort,  throw  into 
confusion,  from  which  was  made  the  Gothic  comparative 
wairs-iz-a,  and  the  corresponding  Old  High  German  wirs-ir-o. 
If  this  be  so,  one  sibilant  had  dropped  out  before  the  Norman 
Conquest,  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  adjective  had  become  weor, 
wyr-se,  wyr-st.  A  comparative,  however,  formed  by  means 
of  s  is  very  unusual.  Less  is  the  only  other  example  of  which 
I  am  aware.  To  confuse  the  matter  still  more,  comparatives 
like  wer,  werre,  warre,  waur  came  into  use  in  England,  and 
still  more  in  Scotland,  as  Scandinavian  influence  assimilated 
the  s  of  worse  to  r. 

"  The  world  is  much  war  than  it  was  woont." — Spenser. 

A  comparative  wors-er  came  into  use  in  the  sixteenth 
century : 

"  A  dreadful  quiet  felt,  and  worser  far 
Than  arms,  a  sullen  interval  of  war." 

Dryden. 

But  it  can  scarcely  have  been  based  upon  any  philological 
reason. 

Evil — from  the  earliest  times  both  noun  and  adjective ;  in 
the  latter  use  equal  to  bad,  and  borrowing  the  same  com- 
parative and  superlative.    It  has  also  been  used  as  an  adverb. 

"  The  same  dealt  subtilly  with  our  kindred,  and  evil  entreated 
our  fathers." — Acts  vii.,  19. 

But  that  part  of  its  duty  is  now  transferred  to  ill.  Evil 
is  now  almost  exclusively  used  as  a  noun. 

Good — The  comp.  and  superl.,  better  and  best,  are  from  a 
different  root,  bat,  meaning  good.  The  Goth,  was  bat-iz-a  for 
the  comp.,  superl.  bat-is-ta.  Our  best  is  obviously  a  shorten- 
ing of  bet-est. 


Adjectives,  301 

111 — a  duplicate  and  Scandinavian  form  of  evil,  due  to  the 
settlement  of  the  Danes. 

Little — a  lengthened  form  of  A.-S.  lyt,  still  to  be  met  with 
in  England  as  a  dialectic  form  ;  from  a  root  /«/,  to  stoop  or 
be  low  ;  compare  Eng.  lout  and  Scot.  lout.  The  comp.  and 
superl.  are  from  a  root  las,  to  be  feeble.  The  A.-S.  Ices  and 
Icest,  shortened  forms  for  Ices-sa  and  Ices-ast,  in  which  the  sa 
is  by  assimilation  for  ra.   A  double  comparative  is  common : 

"The  more  my  prayer  the  lesser  is  my  grace." 

"  Midsummer  Night's  Dream,"  act  ii. 
"  The  greater  light  to  rule  the  day,  and  the  lesser  light  to  rule 
the  night."— Genesis. 

A  regular  superlative  littlest  is  sometimes  met  with : 

*'  Where  love  is  great,  the  littlest  doubts  are  fear." — "  Hamlet," 
iii.,  2.     (Late  edition.) 

Many — from  an  Aryan  root  mag,  to  prevail  or  be  great, 
spring  a  large  family  of  kindred  words.  Sometimes  the 
sound  of  n  was  intruded,  making  mank  or  mang,  at  others 
-el  was  added,  as  in  the  case  of  little,  and  again  the  guttural 
was  softened  into  ch.  Among  the  best-known  members  of 
this  family  are:  Gr.  meg-as,  meg-al-e,  meg-a ;  Lat.  mag-nus, 
mag-US,  mag-is-ter  ;  Goth,  manag-s ;  O.  H.  Ger.  manac  ;  A.-S. 
manig ;  Eng.  many  ;  Icel.  magn,  main  strength,  margr,  many, 
mik-ill,  large,  mj'dk,  much  ;  A.-S.  md,  more,  mag-an,  may, 
mceg-en,  main,  myc-el,  great,  many,  much ;  Scot,  mae,  mair, 
maist,mickle  ox  muckle  ;  Middle  Rng.  muck-el ;  Rng.mag-ic, 
majes-ty,  mag-is-trate,  maj-or,  main,  may,  many,  much,  more, 
most,  and  even  Mr.  Many  is  applied  to  numbers,  and  much 
to  quantity.  Anglo-Saxon  and  English  until  the  seventeenth 
century  had  correspondingly  separate  comparatives : 

"  Many  mo  unto  the  nombre  of  ten  thousande  and  moo." — 
Caxton,  cited  by  Maetzner. 

Alexander  Gill,  a  grammarian  of  1619,  gave  the  two  com- 
parisons thus  : 

many  mo  most 

much  more  most 


302  English  Grammar. 

Since  that  time  mo  has  gone  wholly  out  of  use.  A  or  an 
is  often  put  after  majiy  : 

"  Of  gallant  Gordons  many  a  one, 
And  many  a  stubborn  Highlandman 
And  many  a  rugged  border  clan, 

With  Huntley  and  with  Home." 

Scott  :  "  Marmion,"  canto  vi. 

This  curious  idiom  dates  from  the  beginning  of  the  thir- 
teenth century.  The  many  sometimes  regarded  as  a  noun 
is  from  a  derivative  form,  A.-S.  menigeo,  a  throng,  a  multi- 
tude ;  but  that  it  is  not  equivalent  to  a  noun  will  be  seen 
by  comparing  it  with  multitude  : 

a  great  many  men  : 

a  great  multitude  of  men. 

Together  with  few,  it  rather  belongs  to  the  large  hybrid 
class  of  adjective  pronouns. 

Much — See  many. 

Near — Originally,  and  in  its  form,  this  is  a  comparative : 

A.-S.  Adj.         neah  nearra  nyhst 

Adv.         neah  near,  nyr  nehst 

When  the  comparative  was  mistaken  for  a  positive  in  the 
fifteenth  century,  the  redundant  forms  near-er  and  near-est 
were  added  ;  but  the  old  superlative  is  still  preserved  in  next. 

Nigh — A  variant  form  from  A.-S.  neah,  used  adverbially. 

Nether — a  comp.  for  which  no  positive  remains  ;  A.-S. 
comp.  nith-er-a,  superl.  nithe-ma,  nitke-me-sta.  The  last  is  a 
double  superlative.  The  Scotch  say  neth-most,  but  the 
English  sometimes  attach  an  additional  syllable : 

"  The  neth-er-most  chamber  was  five  cubits  broad." 

I  Kings  vi.,  6. 

This  is  formed  on  the  common  but  false  analogy  of  adding 
the  adverb  most. 

Old — has  two  models  of  comparison,  an  earlier  old,  elder, 
eldest,  and  a  later,  old,  older,  oldest.  The  vowel  change  in 
the  former  is  similar  to  that  in  men,  feet,  etc.  This  is  the 
only  remaining  example  of  such  change  in  adjectives,  but 


Adjectives. 


303 


formerly  it  applied  to  broad,  long,  strong,  and  others,  and  has 
left  a  trace  in  eld,  breadth,  length,  and  strength.  Elder  and 
eldest  are  now  archaic  forms,  confined  to  persons.  An 
antique  structure  is  not  the  eldest  but  the  oldest  house  in 
town.  They  do  not  imply  great  age,  but  only  priority  in 
age.  The  eldest  may  be  the  senior  of  a  group  of  children  ; 
the  oldest  is  more  likely  to  be  the  senior  in  a  conclave  of 
aged  men.  It  would  be  unusual  now  to  place  than  after 
elder.  But  these  are  modern  distinctions,  and  even  now 
not  strictly  observed. 

"  I  have  *  *  *  a  son  *  *  *  some  years  elder  than 
this," — Shakesp. 

"  With  us  are  both  the  gray-headed  and  very  aged  men,  much 
elder  than  thy  father." — Job  xv.,  10. 

Longfellow  speaks  of  "  the  elder  days  of  art,"  and  the 
"  faded  fancies  of  an  elder  world  "  ;  but  then  poets  write 
in  the  oldest  dialect  that  people  will  put  up  with. 

Rather — Of  the  full  comparison,  rath,  rath-er,  ratJi-est — 
soon  or  early,  etc. — only  the  second  term  remains,  and  that 
has  lost  an  initial  //,  and  is  used  only  as  an  adverb. 

Although  grammarians  reckon  only  three  degrees  of 
quality,  they  might  with  almost  equal  propriety  have  in- 
cluded a  fourth,  making  the  full  comparison : 

green-ish  green  green-er  green-est 

Several  other  shades  are  expressed  by  the  aid  of  such  words 
as  slightly,  somewhat,  rather,  very,  highly,  sadly,  or  exceedingly. 

Some  adjectives,  chiefly  derived  from  nouns,  do  not  admit 
of  comparison.     They  are : 

I.  Adjectives  that  denote  material,  origin,  source,  author- 
ship, time,  place,  constitution  : 


alcoholic 

diluvial 

annual 

rhombic. 

calcareous 

oceanic 

vernal 

oval 

woollen 

volcanic 

daily 

lamellar 

solar 

American 

hourly 

metallic 

stellar 

Parisian 

subterranean 

fluid 

atmospheric 

Mosaic 

terraqueous 

gaseous 

alluvial 

Cartesian 

circular 

crystalline 

304  English  Grammar, 

2.  Words  that  in  themselves  express  an  extreme  degree : 
empty y  void,  eternal,  infinite,  perfect,  perpetual,  universal. 

3.  A  miscellaneous  class  of  adjectives,  mostly  expressing 
relations  rather  than  qualities  :  baptismal,  false ,  filial,  lawful, 
natural,  parental,  royal,  true. 

Thus  far  the  double  comparatives  and  superlatives  that 
have  been  noticed  are  single  words  that  do  not  always 
openly  betray  their  cumulative  character.  Duplicate  or  trip- 
licate expressions,  like  more  superior,  most  handsomest,  are 
not  according  to  the  present  usage  of  the  language,  but 
down  to  the  seventeenth  century  such  redundancy  was  com- 
mon enough. 

''''Most  clennest  flesh  of  briddes." — "  Piers  Plowman,"  8992. 
"  These  poore  informall  women,  are  no  more 
But  instruments  of  some  more  mightier  member 
That  sets  them  on." — "  Meas.  for  Meas.,"  act  v. 
"  more  fairer  then  fair,  beautifull  then  beautious." 

"  Love's  Labor  's  Lost,"  act  iv. 
"  This  was  the  most  unkindest  cut  of  all," 

"  Julius  Caesar,"  ii.,  2. 
"  After  the  most  straitest  sect  of  our  religion  I  lived  a  Pharisee." 

Acts  xxvi.,  5. 

The  last  point  that  I  shall  consider  here,  touching  adjec- 
tives, is  the  question  whether  in  speaking  of  two  things 
that  are  good  in  different  degrees,  we  ought  to  say  "  the 
better  of  the  two,"  or  "  the  best  of  the  two,"  or  may  properly 
say  either.  The  particular  adjective  used  makes  no  differ- 
ence. Expressions  like  "  the  better  of  the  two  "  are  so  com- 
mon, at  least  in  literary  English,  that  there  remains  no 
question  of  their  admissibility.  Still  I  think  that  plain 
intelligent  people,  who  are  neither  finical  nor  coarse,  are 
more  apt,  in  their  conversation,  to  say  "  the  best  of  the  two." 
And  the  spoken  language  of  such  people  is  generally  truer, 
purer,  more  idiomatic  English  than  what  they  write  with 
the  help  of  stilts,  spectacles,  dictionary,  and  grammar. 

If  languages  were  more  amenable  to  reason  than  they 
are,  the  question  might  be  analyzed  in  the  manner  follow- 


Adjectives.  305 

ing :  The  comparative  treats  of  two,  quite  apart  from  and 
in  a  manner  contrasted  with,  each  other,  of  which  the  one 
exceeds  the  other.  The  superlative  treats  of  a  group,  aggre- 
gate, or  class,  and  singles  out  one  as  the  leader,  who  must 
always  be  a  member  of  the  class.  There  is  no  contrast. 
The  oldest  member  of  the  senate  is  not  contrasted  in  any 
way  with  the  other  senators.  Ranged  in  a  line  according  to 
age  some  one  must  be  at  one  extremity  of  the  line,  and 
some  one  else  at  the  other,  but  all  are  alike  parts  of  the 
continuous  line.  The  question  then  resolves  itself  into 
this  :  Can  a  group,  aggregate,  or  class — that  is,  for  purposes 
of  speech — consist  of  only  two  ?  If  it  can,  then  one  may 
be  the  best  of  the  two.  Indeed,  if  I  mistake  not,  there  are 
some  cases  in  which  we  would  nearly  all  use  the  superlative. 
Most  persons  would  be  apt  to  say  :  "  The  first  half  of  the 
day  was  rainy,  but  the  last  half  was  quite  clear."  Yet  there 
are  but  two  halves.  To  say  the  former  half  and  the  latter 
half  would  be  stiff,  pedantic,  and  redolent  of  a  bad  quality 
of  midnight  oil.  Or  in  speaking  of  the  arrival  of  two  per- 
sons, with  a  short  interval  between,  should  we  say  the  first 
comer  and  the  last  comer,  or  the  former  comer  and  the 
latter  comer  ?  To  say  the  first  and  the  second  would  be 
shirking  the  question,  as  second  is  neither  comparative  nor 
superlative.  Or  would  it  improve  the  matter  to  say  the 
former  and  the  second?  Or  again,  in  speaking  of  two  en- 
gaged in  a  race,  are  they  respectively  the  foremost  and  the 
hindmost,  or  the  former  and  the  hinder  ? 

While  I  admit  that  the  written  language  shows  a  prefer- 
ence for  the  comparative,  as  applied  to  two,  yet  the  super- 
lative is  also  used,  and,  I  think,  with  more  logical  consist- 
ency.    Sir  John  Mandeville,  speaking  of  two  brothers,  says, 

"  So  that  his  eldest  sane  was  chosen  aftre  him,  Melchemader ;  the 
whiche  his  brother  leet  sle  prevely." 

"  Hadde  tuo  sones    *    *    *    of  which  the  eldest  hight  Algarsif." 

Chaucer  :  "  C.  T.,"  10,343. 
"  I  would  haue  put  my  wealth  into  Donation. 
And  the  best  halfe  should  haue  retum'd  to  him." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Timon,"  iii.,  2. 


3o6  English  Grammar. 

"Your  eldest  Doughters  haue  foredone  themselves." 

"  Lear,"  v.,  3. 

In  this  instance  the  comparison  is  between  two  parties,  the 
eldest  sisters  on  one  side  and  the  youngest  on  the  other. 

"  The  question  is  not  whether  a  good  Indian  or  a  bad  English- 
man be  most  happy,  but  which  state  is  most  desirable." 

Johnson  :  "  Life  of  Sir  F.  Drake." 

So,  numerous  examples,  from  the  beginning  of  the  thir- 
teenth century  to  the  present  time,  might  be  found  ;  but  let 
the  following  suffice. 

"  Tha  answerede  the  other,  [Hengist] 

that  wes  the  aldeste  brother." — Layamon. 

"  One  of  the  greatest  questions  of  moral  philosophy  :  whether 
the  enjoying  of  outward  things,  or  the  contemning  of  them  be  the 
greatest" — Bacon  :  "Advancement  of  Learning." 

"  Master  Simon  and  the  general,  who  have  become  great  cronies. 
As  the  former  is  \h& youngest  \)y  many  years,"  etc. 

Irving  :  "  Bracebridge  Hall." 

"  I  rather  apprehend  that  the  latter  would  be  the  likeliest  of  the 
two  to  speak  the  fitting  word." 

Hawthorne  :  "  Blithedale  Romance,"  xvi. 

"many  women  would   have  deemed  you  the  worthier  conquest 
of  the  two,  you  are  certainly  much  the  handsomest  man. — Id.^  xxvi. 

"the  swiftest  runner  of  the  two." 
"  the  strongest  person  of  the  two." 
"the  likeliest  interpretation  of  the  two." 
"which  could  run  the  fastest  of  the  two," 

WiLKiE  Collins  :  "  Man  and  Wife." 

"These  two  sections  do  not  progress  at  the  same  rate.  The 
smallest  in  area  is  still  the  smallest  in  population,  but  it  is  gaining 
fast  upon  the  other." — North  Am,  Review^  Jan.,  1889. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
PRONOUNS. 

We  now  come  upon  a  distinction  that  goes  deep  into  the 
structure  of  language.  It  is  the  distinction  between  words 
that,  even  standing  alone,  are  significant,  or  suggestive,  and 
words  that  by  themselves  express  nothing.  If  the  word  rose 
be  uttered,  it  calls  up  in  the  mind  a  tolerably  distinct  image. 
So  does,  in  a  less  degree,  the  word  red ;  and  if  we  join  the 
two,  making  red  rose,  the  mental  image  is  complete.  Again, 
in  the  words  mother  comes,  nothing  is  wanting  to  a  complete 
statement  of  fact.  On  the  other  hand,  we  may  take  nine 
words  that  may  properly  enough  come  together, — yet  iftJiere 
should  ever  be  any,  even  the, — and  no  meaning  is  expressed, 
or  remotely  hinted  at.  No  number  or  combination  of  such 
words  could  tell  anything.  They  are  the  mere  pins  and 
couplings  of  discourse.  The  most  substantial  of  them  are 
like  the  a,  h,  c  of  the  algebraist,  that  must  have  new  values 
assigned  every  time  they  are  used,  having  none  of  their 
own.  Chief  among  them  is  the  capital  /,  which  is  at  one 
time,  /,  Alexander  IL,  Tsar  of  all  the  Russias ;  and  at 
another,  /,  little  Johnny  Tims. 

It  has  been  made  pretty  clear  already  that  I  regard  the 
subject  of  discourse  to  be  things,  their  qualities  and  actions, 
expressed  by  nouns,  adjectives,  and  verbs.  This  enumeration 
requires  an  addition,  more  apparent  than  real.  A  quality 
that  characterizes  a  thing  is  called  an  adjective,  but  when  it 
describes  an  action  it  is  called  an  adverb.  Fierce  and  fiercely 
express  the  same  characteristic.  The  difference  is  merely 
grammatical.  Adjectives  used  as  adverbs,  with  or  without 
the  addition  of  -ly,  belong  to  the  division  of  self-significant 

307 


3o8  English  Grammar. 

words,  I  shall  distinguish  these  two  great  divisions  as 
independent  and  dependent  words,  observing,  however,  that 
no  classification  can  be  carried  out  strictly.  It  seems  prob- 
able that  all  were  originally  self-significant,  but  that  in  the 
lapse  of  ages  many  have  gradually  lost  their  individuality 
and  become  mere  attendants  on  the  more  substantial  words, 
indicating  their  relations  and  conditions.  And  this  process 
is  constantly  going  on,  and  examples  may  be  found  illus- 
trating every  stage  in  its  progress.  To  trace  these  words 
to  their  independent  sources  was  the  task  which  John  Home 
Tooke  assumed  in  his  "  Diversions  of  Purley  "  ;  but,  owing  to 
the  imperfect  knowledge  of  his  time,  his  success  was  very  in- 
complete. He  merely  showed  others  in  what  direction  to  look. 

Among  the  most  important  of  these  words  that  have  no 
individuality  now  are  the  Pronouns.  The  name  means  stand- 
ing for  or  representing  nouns ;  and  there  is  no  possible  noun 
for  which  some  of  them  may  not  be  used.  Hence  a  pronoun 
has  been  termed  a  name  for  everything.  Associated  with 
them  are  some  words  which,  not  in  signification,  but  in 
grammatical  use,  partake  of  the  character  of  adjectives. 
They  sometimes  take  the  place  of  nouns,  and  sometimes 
accompany  them.  But  here,  as  we  might  expect,  there  is 
an  insensible  gradation  from  words  that  never  go  with  nouns 
to  others  never  found  without  them.  Those  that  partake  of 
the  adjective  character  are  sometimes  called  adjective  pro- 
nouns, and  sometimes  pronominal  adjectives.  I  shall  use 
the  former  appellation,  and  include  under  it  a  larger  number 
than  is  usual. 

Pronouns  are  commonly  grouped  under  several  subdivi- 
sions, not  always  the  same,  or  including  the  same  words.  It 
will  be  sufficient  here  to  designate  them  as  Personal,  Inter- 
rogative, Relative,  Adjective,  and  Indefinite  Pronouns.  These 
subdivisions  are  all  very  small,  except  the  fourth,  which  is 
very  large — indeed,  unlimited. 

PERSONAL  PRONOUNS. 

These  generally  represent  nouns,  and  do  not,  like  adjec- 
tives, accompany  them.     They  are  three  in  number,  with 


Pronouns,  309 

their  respective  inflections  and  combinations.  They  are 
called  personal  because  they  introduce  a  distinction  of  the 
speaker,  the  person  spoken  to,  and  a  third,  who  is  neither. 
They  are  /,  thou,  he,  and  their  variations.  /  tell  you  that  he 
is  at  home. 

While  nouns  have  only  two  forms  to  indicate  case,  personal 
pronouns  have  three, — Nominative,  Possessive,  and  Objective. 
The  last  also  serves  the  purpose  of  a  Dative,  for  which  there 
is  now  no  separate  form.  All  have  two  numbers, — singular 
and  plural.  In  old  books  remains  of  a  dual  may  be  found. 
The  first  and  second  persons  have  no  distinction  of  gender 
in  any  Aryan  tongue.  The  third  has  separate  forms  for  the 
masculine,  feminine,  and  neuter. 

The  Pronoun  of  the  First  Person. 
The  pronoun  of  the  first  person  is  thus  declined  : 


SINGULAR 

PLURAL 

Nominative 

I 

we 

Possessive 

mine 

ours 

Objective 

me 

us 

It  is  evident  that  these  can  scarcely  be  inflectional  modifi- 
cations of  a  single  original,  but  are  rather  water-worn  chips 
from  several  quarries,  but  how  many  ultimate  sources,  all 
inaccessible,  it  were  hard  to  determine.  Bopp  supposes 
four, — ah,  ak  or  ag,  ma,  as  and  ve.  There  cannot  be  less 
than  the  first  and  second  of  these  ;  but  the  number  is  uncer- 
tain, and  to  us  here  unimportant.  These  personal  pronouns 
are  similarly  worn  down  and  irregular  in  all  Aryan  languages, 
and  are  as  inexplicable  in  the  earliest  literary  monuments  as 
in  the  latest.  The  h,  k,  or  g  is  an  essential  part  of  the 
singular  nominative,  and  has  kept  its  place  in  most  of  the 
allied  languages.  Its  disappearance  from  literary  English  is 
comparatively  recent,  and  traces  of  it  may  still  be  found  in 
rustic  dialects.  The  following  are  some  of  the  principal 
forms  assumed  by  this  pronoun  : 

Sing.  Nom.  Sansk.  ah-am ;  Gr.  iy-oov ,  ey-oo  ,•  Lat.  eg-o ; 
Old  High  German  ih ;  Mod.  H.  Ger.  ich  ;  Goth,  ik ;  Norse 


310  English  Grammar. 

3ind  Icelandic  ekyjak,  eg,  j'eg;  Swedish  y«^/  Da.n.je^;  Old- 
and  Anglo-Sax.  tc;  English  (a.  d.  iooo  to  1600)  z/i,  ike,  ic, 
ice,  ich,  ych,  uch,  'ch,  y,  I. 

Sing.  Pos.  Sansk.  ma-ma;  Gr.  iixoij,  fjioij^  Lat.  met,  or 
wanting;  Goth,  meina ;  High  Ger.,  Norse,  Old  Sax.  A.-S. 
min  ;  Eng.  mine,  myn,  mi,  my. 

Sing.  Obj.  Sansk.  m,dm,  md',  Gr.  «/<4  f^^  i  Lat.  me ;  Goth, 
and  Norse  mik ;  H.  G.  mich;  A.-S.  inec,  me ;  Eng.  me,  mee. 

Plur.  Nom.  Sansk.  v ay-am ;  Gr.  aiJifxai^  ri^li?  ^  Lat.  nos ; 
Goth,  vets ;  H.  G.  wir ;  Norse  ver ;  A.-S.  and  Eng.  we,  wee. 

Plur.  Pos.  Sansk.  as-md-kam ;  Gr.  ajdpiecov,  i^/a^v  ^  Lat. 
nostri,  or  wanting  ;  Goth,  unsara  ;  H.  Ger.  unser  ;  A.-S.  and 
O.  S.  User,  lire ;  Norse  vdr,  v6r ;  Eng.  ure,  ur,  hure,  our, 
ourn,  ours. 

Plur.  Obj.  Sansk.  as-md-n,  nas ;  Gr.  ajxixs?,  rf^ai ^  Lat.  nos ; 
Goth,  unsis,  uns ;  O.  H.  G.  unsih ;  Mod.  H.  G.  uns ;  Norse 
OSS ;  O.  S.  lis ;  A.-S.  lisic,  lis;  Eng.  us. 

Sanskrit  and  Greek  had  a  dual  number, — we  two,  etc.  We 
two  and  you  two  were  preserved  in  all  the  early  Teutonic 
languages  as  relics  of  a  dual  number,  once  probably  of  wide 
extent.  The  A.-S.  was  wet,  we  two  ;  uncer,  of  us  two  ;  unc, 
to  or  for  us  two ;  unc,  or  uncit,  us  two.  These  forms  sur- 
vived till  the  last  half  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

"  Unk  schal  i-tide  harm  and  chonde." 
(Harm  and  shame  shall  betide  us  twain?) 

"Owl  and  Nightingale,"  a.  d.  1250. 

"  Whi  neltu  fleon  into  the  bare, 
And  schewi  whether  unker  beo 
Of  bri3ter  heowe,  of  vairur  bleo  ?  " 
(Why  won't  you  fly  into  the  clear, 
And  show  whether  of  us  two  be 
Of  brighter  hue,  of  fairer  blue  ? ) — Id. 

Me  and  us  follow  old  datives  in  form  and  accusatives  in 
signification  ;  and  the  same  is  true  of  thee,  you,  him,  her,  them. 
In  such  expressions  as  give  mc,  tell  us,  like  him,  the  dative 
signification  is  preserved.     It  is  not  uncommon  now  to  say 


Pronouns.  311 

that  in  such  cases  to  is  understood  ;  but  that  is  misleading. 
It  is  true  that  in  modern  speech  we  may,  and  often  do,  insert 
to ;  but  it  was  not  so  from  the  beginning.  There  is  no 
original  to  dropped.  In  methinks,  it  seems  to  me,  me  is 
dative  in  sense,  and  thinks  is  impersonal,  from  thyncan,  to 
seem  ;  quite  a  different  word  from  tkencan,  to  think.  The 
two  parts  were  sometimes  written  separately : 

"  Al  hali  kirk,  as  thine  me, 
May  by  this  schippe  takened  be." 
(All  holy  Church,  as  thinketh  me. 
May  by  this  ship  betokened  be.) 

"  Cursor  Mundi,"  a.  d.  1320. 

As  methinks  dies  out,  expressions  arise,  like  thinks  I  to 
myself,  that  never  had  grammatical  or  any  other  consistency. 
Languages  are  full  of  such.  But  to  return.  There  are 
expressions  like  the  following : 

"  Woe  is  me,  for  I  am  undone." — Isaiah  vi.,  5. 

"  Wei  is  thee" — Coverdale's  Bible. 

"  Woe  is  us  that  we  weren  bom." — "  Havelok,  the  Dane." 

This  dative  pronoun  was  often  used  without  any  visible  need : 

"leape  me  ouer  this  Stoole,  and  runne  away." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Henry  VI.,"  part  ii.,  2,  i, 

Shakespeare  makes  this  usage  the  basis  of  some  of  his 
interminable  punning : 

^^  Petr.  Knocke,  I  say. 

"  Gru.  Knocke,  sir  ?  Whom  should  I  knocke  ?  Is  there  any 
man  ha's  rebus'd  your  worship  ? 

"  Petr.     Villaine,  I  say,  knocke  me  heere  soundly. 

"  Gru.  Knocke  you  heere,  sir  ?  Why,  sir  ?  What  am  I,  sir, 
that  I  should  knocke  you  heere,  sir  ? 

*^  Petr.  Villaine,  I  say,  knocke  me'  at  this  gate,  and  rap  me 
well,  or  I  '11  knocke  your  knave's  pate.         *         *         * 

"  ITor.     How,  now  ;  what  's  the  matter  ?        *         *         * 


312  English  Grammar. 

"  Gru.  *  *  *  He  bid  me  knocke  him,  and  rap  him  soundly, 
sir.     Well,  was  it  fit  for  a  servant  to  use  his  master  so  ?  " 

"  Taming  of  the  Shrew,"  i.,  2. 

It  was  probably  due  to  French  influence  that  the  Saxon 
ic  became  early  English  ich  (pronounced  like  modern  itcJi). 
This  ich  often  united  with  the  following  word  making  icham, 
I  am  ;  ichabbe  and  ichave,  I  have  ;  icholle  and  ichulle,  I  will ; 
ichot,  I  wot,  etc.  Next  the  i  was  dropped,  leaving  chain, 
chulle,  etc.  When  Edgar,  in  "  King  Lear,"  is  personating  a 
Kentish  fool,  he  says  : 

"  Chill  not  let  go,  zir. 
Without  vurther  'casion." 

A  shrinking  from  self-assertion,  a  real  or  assumed  modesty, 
sometimes  leads  to  an  avoidance  of  the  obtrusive  /.  So 
kings  and  editors  say  we — the  speaker  hiding  his  personality 
in  the  collective  body  of  the  government  or  of  the  editorial 
staff.  Such,  I  opine,  is  the  source  of  what  may  be  called  the 
pronoun — not  of  majesty,  but  of  modesty.  But  the  editors 
carry  it  out  the  most  consistently.  They  say,  ourselves, 
where  a  monarch  would  say  ourself. 

There  is  a  curious  anomaly,  that  seems  also  due  to  French 
influence,  in  the  phrase  it  is  me.  The  Saxons  rendered 
Matt,  xiv.,  27,  ic  hyt  eom,  I  it  am.  Wycliffe,  following  the 
original  tongues,  wrote  briefly  /  am.  Tyndale  expressed 
the  same  by,  it  is  Y,  and  is  as  usual  closely  followed  by  the 
authorized  version.  The  "  Harrowing  of  Hell,"  A.D.  1280, 
agrees  with  the  Saxon — ich  it  am.  Those  who  wish  to  be 
precise  now  follow  the  Scripture  and  say  it  is  I ;  but  nine- 
teen persons  in  twenty  imitate  the  French,  cest  moi,  it  isme ; 
and  bad  as  that  is  it  is  likely  to  prevail.  Not  only  so,  but, 
it  is  him,  that  is  them,  are  pretty  sure  to  follow  the  French 
cest  lui.  Better  would  it  have  been  to  keep  to  the  analogies 
of  our  mother  tongue,  /  am  it,  thou  art  it,  I  am  he,  John 
ix.,  9.     German  version,  Ich  bin  es. 

"  Who  koude  ryme  in  English  properly 
His  martirdom  ;  for  sothe  it  am  noght  /." 

Chaucer  ;  "  Knight's  Tale." 


Pronouns. 

The  Pronoun  of  the  Second  Person. 

SINGULAR 

PLURAL 

Nominative 

thou 

ye,  you 

Possessive 

thine 

yours 

Objective 

thee 

you 

313 


It  has  been  thought  that  these  forms  may  be  all  from  one 
original,  and  that/  may  result  from  a  softening  of  th. 

Singular  Nom.  Sansk.  tvam ;  Gr.  av^  Lat.  tji ;  Goth. 
thu  ;  A.-S.  thu ;  Eng.  thou. 

Sing.  Pos.  Sansk.  tava,  te ;  Gr.  gov  -^  Lat,  tui,  or  wanting; 
Goth,  theina ;  A.-S.  thin  ;  Eng.  thin,  thine,  thy. 

Sing.  Obj.  Sansk.  tvdm,  tva  ;  Gr.  ai  ^  Lat.  te ;  Goth,  thik ; 
A.-S.  the  ;  Eng.  the,  thee. 

Plur.  Nom.  S^insk.  yu-yam ;  Gr.v-fxfxe^jV-^iiij  l^at.  vos; 
Goth,  yu-s  ;  A.-S.  g-e  ;  Eng.  ye,  you. 

Plur.  Pos.  Sansk. yu-shma-kam  ;  Gr.  v-fxjxioov,  t5-//c5v,-  Lat. 
vestri,  or  wanting;  Goth,  iz-vara  ;  A.-S.  eower  ;  Eng.  your. 

Plur.  Obj.  San^.  yushmdn,  vas ;  Gr.  v-}xai^  Lat.  vos ; 
Goth,  izvis  ;  A.-S.  edwic,  edw  ;  Eng.  you. 

The  singular  of  this  pronoun  has  gone  almost  out  of  use, 
being  now  confined  to  prayer  and  a  serious  style  of  poetry  ; 
as  religion  and  poetry  cling  to  what  is  old.  The  same  cause 
that  prevents  many  from  blurting  out  /  do  thus  and  so,  leads 
them  to  find  some  substitute  for  thou ;  and  several  devices 
have  been  adopted.  The  English,  French,  and  Dutch  say 
you,  the  Germans  and  Danes  they,  the  Italians  she  and  her, 
the  Spaniards  your  worship,  and  the  Swedes  the  master.  So 
thou  came  to  express  great  familiarity,  or  inferiority  in  the 
person  addressed,  or  both.  Away  back  in  the  times  of  the 
Plantagenets  tJiou  and  ye  were  signs  of  an  assumed  difference 
in  dignity.  Robert  de  Brunne — A.D.  1303 — gives  a  long 
conversation  between  a  husband  and  wife,  in  which  she 
addresses  her  lord  as  ye ;  and  he  accepts  the  homage  by 
saying  thou  to  her.  That  was  in  the  age  of  chivalry  and 
before  the  present  Women's  Rights  agitation.  To  thou  a 
person  was  often  an  insult,  that  might  lead  to  consequences. 
In  "  Blind  Harry  the  Minstrel "  young  Wallace  says  thou  to  an 


314  English  Grammar. 

Englishman,  \yho  indignantly  retorts :  "  Quham  thowis  thou, 
Scot  ?  "  So  Sir  Edward  Coke  showed  the  insolence  of  office 
and  the  malignity  of  the  man  when  he  addressed  Raleigh 
from  the  Bench : 

"  All  that  Lord  Cobham  did  was  at  thy  instigation,  thou  viper  ! 
for  I  thou  thee  thou  traitor  !  " 

At  length,  in  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the 
Quakers  protested  against  this  and  other  sinful  vanities. 
Charles  Fox  wrote  in  1648  : 

"When  the  Lord  sent  me  forth  into  the  world,  I  was  required 
to  thee  and  thou  all  men  and  women,  without  any  respect  to  rich 
or  poor,  great  or  small.  But,  ah  !  the  rage  that  then  was  in 
priests,  magistrates,  and  people  of  all  sorts,  but  especially  in 
priests  and  professors ;  for  though  thou  to  a  single  person,  was 
according  to  their  own  learning,  their  accidence,  and  their  gram- 
mar rules,  they  could  not  bear  it." 

Thirteen  years  later  he  wrote : 

"  The  book  called  the  *  Battle-door '  came  forth,  written  to 
show  that,  in  all  languages,  thou  and  thee  is  the  proper  and  usual 
speech  to  a  single  person,  and  you  to  more  than  one.  This  was 
set  forth  in  examples  taken  from  the  Scriptures,  and  out  of  books 
of  teaching  in  about  thirty  languages.  When  the  book  was  fin- 
ished, some  of  the  copies  were  presented  to  the  king  and  his 
council,  to  the  bishops  of  Canterbury,  and  to  the  two  universities, 
one  apiece.  The  king  said  it  was  proper  language  for  all  nations  ; 
and  the  Bishop  of  London  being  asked  what  he  thought  of  it, 
was  so  at  a  stand  that  he  could  not  tell  what  to  say  ;  for  it  did 
so  inform  and  convince  people  that  few  afterwards  were  so  rug- 
ged toward  us  for  saying  thou  and  thee  to  a  single  person,  which 
before  they  were  exceeding  fierce  against  us  for." 

As  a  matter  of  grammar  nothing  could  be  more  correct, 
but  correctness  alone  is  not  a  thing  to  win  acceptance.  At 
the  present  time  we  do  not  thou  any  one,  and  there  is  no 
longer  any  ground  for  a  difference  or  peculiarity  of  address. 
But  strangely  enough  the  Quakers,  who  used  to  say  thou  art, 
and  might  now  with  a  clear  conscience  say  you  are,  really  say 


Pronouns,  315 

thee  is,  an  absurdity  in  speech  that  has  no  justification.  It 
is  one  of  a  few  rather  harmless  oddities  unworthy  of  a  body 
of  people  in  many  respects  so  estimable. 

ThoUy  like  the  pronoun  of  the  first  person,  had  formerly  a 
dual  number,  the  cases  of  which  were  in  A.  -'^.,git,  incer,  inc, 
incit, 

"  Either  of  ow  havith  his  stunde  to  speokene,  ne  nis  incker 
nothres  tale  to  schunien  in  his  time." 

(Either  of  you  hath  his  turn  to  speak,  nor  isn't  neither  of  you 
two  to  shun  talk  in  his  time.) 

"The  Soul's  Ward,"  a.d.,  1210. 

The  last  appearance  of  this  dual  was  in  the  "  Lay  of  Have- 
lok,"  A.D.  1300,  by  which  time  it  had  become  confounded 
with  the  dual  of  the  first  person. 

"  Gripeth  ether  unker  a  god  tree." 
(Grip  either  of  you  two  a  good  tree.) 

The  distinction  between  the  Nom.  ye  and  the  Obj.  you  is 
preserved  in  the  older  English  writers.  It  is  well  maintained 
in  the  Bible  throughout. 

"  No  doubt  but  ye  are  the  people,  and  wisdom  shall  die  with 
you." — Job  xii.,  2. 

At  present  ye  is  properly  used  only  to  impart  solemnity  and 
grandeur  to  poetry,  as  in  the  following  from  Coleridge. 

"  Ye  living  flowers  that  skirt  the  eternal  frost ! 
Ye  wild  goats  sporting  round  the  eagle's  nest ! 
Ye  eagles,  playmates  of  the  mountain  storm  ! 
Ye  lightnings,  the  dread  arrows  of  the  clouds  ! 
Ye  signs  and  wonders  of  the  element ! 
Utter  forth  God,  and  fill  the  hills  with  praise." 

But  poets  are  apt  to  think  that  they  have  a  license  to  defy 
both  rhyme  and  reason,  and  finding  that  ye,  used  legitimately 
as  a  nominative,  serves  a  good  purpose,  think  to  attain  the 
same  by  using  it  as  an  objective,  whereby  nothing  is 
gained. 


3i6  English  Grammar. 

'*  A  south-west  blow  ov\.yee'' — Shakesp.  :  "Tempest." 

"I  itzxye  not,  I  know_y<?." — Byron. 

"  Bethink 7<?,  before j'^  make  answer." — Longfellow. 

In  the  last  example  "  Bethink  ^<7«  "  would  have  made  better 
English  and  better  poetry. 

The  Pronoun  of  the  Third  Person. 

This  is  the  only  word  in  the  language  now  that  expresses 
the  distinction  of  gender  ;  and  it  does  so  only  in  the  singu- 
lar number.     It  is  declined  thus  : 


SINGULAR. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

NOM. 

he 

she 

it 

Poss. 

his 

hers 

its 

Object. 

him 

her 

it 

PLURAL,    ALL   GENDERS. 

Nominative,  they  ;  Possessive,  theirs  ;  Objective,  them. 

This  is  not  so  strictly  a  personal  pronoun  as  the  other  two. 
Its  connection  with  what  are  called  demonstrative  pronouns 
is  evident.  The  singular  is  from  the  same  root  with  here, 
hither,  hence ;  and  the  plural  is  similarly  akin  to  the,  this, 
that,  these,  those,  then,  there,  thither,  thence,  thus  and  an  obso- 
lete thy.     Its  genealogy  has  been  wonderfully  preserved. 

Sansk.,  sa,  sa,  tat. 

Gr.,  6,  tf,  to,  where  o  reprCvSents  regularly  a  Sansk.  a,  and 
the  aspirate  replaces  a  Sansk.  and  Lat.  s.  Homer  uses  this 
word  indifferently  as  a  demonstrative,  an  article,  or  a  per- 
sonal pronoun,  unconscious  of  any  difference. 

Goth.,  sa,  so,  that-a. 

Anglo-Saxon  had  three  pronouns  corresponding  to  our 
he,  this,  and  that,  each  having  three  genders  and  four  cases, 
two  of  them  having  occasional  traces  of  a  fifth  case,  the  In- 
strumental, denoting  that  with  which  anything  is  done.  I 
shall  call  them  here  Nos.  i,  2,  and  3. 


Pronouns. 


317 


No.  I. 


NOM. 

Gen. 
Dat. 
Ace  us. 


SINGULAR. 

Masculine.  Feminine.  Neuter. 

he  heo  hit 

his  hire  his 

heom,  him  hire  heom,  him 

hine  hi,  heo,  hig  hit 

PLURAL,     ALL    GENDERS. 

NoM.  hi,  hie,  hig 

Gen.  hira,  heora 

Dat.  heom,  him 

Accus.  hi,  hie,  heo,  hig 


Observe  that  the  neuter  singular  is  hit,  and  its  genitive  or 
possessive  his. 

No.  2  is  the  demonstrative  pronoun  that. 


SINGULAR. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

NOM. 

se 

seo 

thaet 

Gen. 

thaes 

thaere 

thaes 

Dat. 

tham 

thaere 

thdm 

Ace. 

thone 

tha 

thaet 

Instr. 

thy 

thaere 

thy 

PLURAL, 

ALL  genders. 

NoM.   tha 

Gen.    thara 

Dat.    tham 

Ace.   tha. 

No.  3.     The  demonstrative  this. 

Singular. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

NOM. 

thes 

theos 

this 

Gen. 

thisses 

thisse 

thisses 

Dat. 

thissum 

thisse 

thissum 

Accus. 

thisne 

thas 

this 

Instr. 

thys 

— 

thys 

PLURAL, 

ALL    genders. 

NoM.  and  Ace. 

thas         Gen 

.  thissa,  thissera 

Dat.  thissum 

3i8  English  Grammar. 

Nos.  2  and  3  are  obviously  from  the  same  source,  but 
were  already  distinct  in  the  times  of  our  Anglo-Saxon  an- 
cestors. No.  3  is  supposed  to  have  been  formed  by  com- 
bining the  two  roots  of  No.  2,  while  the  latter  was  oftenest 
used  for  what  is  now  commonly  called  the  article  the,  and  is 
its  source. 

Between  the  Norman  Conquest  and  the  age  of  Elizabeth 
great  confusion  prevailed  in  the  use  of  these  pronouns,  and 
they  assumed  more  shapes  than  can  be  easily  imagined. 
When  they  settled  down,  like  ale  that  has  passed  its  fer- 
mentation, it  was  found  that  No.  2  and  No.  3  had  lost  all 
distinction  of  gender  and  case  ;  that  No.  i  had  lost  the 
feminine  singular  nominative  and  all  its  plurals,  and  taken 
those  of  No.  2,  which  in  turn  had  helped  itself  from  No.  3. 
And  so  the  last-named  plural  became  split  into  these  and 
those,  similarly  to  the  differentiations  than  and  then,  bind 
and  bend,  band  and  bond.  Of  No.  2  nothing  remains  in  its 
original  place  but  the  neuter  singular  that.  In  this  inter- 
necine war  of  words,  lasting  five  hundred  years,  the  main 
tide  of  fight  ebbed  and  flowed  between  the  Anglo-Scan- 
dinavian dialect  of  York  and  Northumberland  on  the  one 
side  and  the  Saxon  of  Southern  England  on  the  other.  The 
northern  dialect  had  for  the  modern  she,  they,  their,  them, 
SCO  or  scho,  thai,  thair,  thaim,  while  the  southern  long  re- 
tained the  older  heo,  hie,  or  hi,  here,  hire,  or  heore,  and  hem. 
The  older  forms  are  still  to  be  found  in  Spenser ;  but  he 
professed  to  use  an  archaic  style.  The  nominatives  were 
the  first  to  be  exchanged.  Along  with  the  Nom.  she  we  still 
retain  the  more  original  her,  and  it  is  quite  common  to  find 
in  old  authors  they  associated  with  her  and  hem. 

"  The  fader  his  doughters  and  her  husbandes 
Loued  fulle  wale,  and  had  hem  leef  and  dere  ; 
Tyme  and  tyme  he  yafe  hem  with  his  handes 
Of  his  goode  passingly,  and  they  such  chere 
Hym  made,  and  were  of  so  pleasaunt  manere, 
That  he  ne  wist  how  to  be  better  at  ese. 
They  coude  him  so  well  cheresshe  and  plese." 

OccLEVE,  A.D.  1420. 


Pronouns.  3 1 9 

The  colloquial  V;«  is  an  abbreviation  of  hem,  not  of  them. 

"  Summon  'em,  Assemble  'em  j  I  will  come  forth  and  shew 
Myself  among  'em.'' — Th.  Southern. 

From  No.  i  are  formed  he,  it,  his,  her,  him,  its.  Here, 
hence,  etc.,  from  the  same  source,  have  become  allied  in 
meaning  to  No.  3.  One  evidence  of  the  great  age  of  No.  i 
is  that  it  has  lost  all  trace  of  a  demonstrative  or  adjective 
meaning,  and  has  become  a  mere  abstract,  colorless  pronoun. 
From  No.  2  we  have  she,  they,  their,  them,  that,  and  the 
adverbs  there,  then,  etc.  ;  from  No.  3  this,  these,  those. 

It  may  be  noticed  that  hit  has  lost  its  initial  h  and  become 
it,  thus  obscuring  its  connection  with  he.  The  accusatives  of 
the  pronouns  are  lost,  and  their  places  are  taken  by  datives. 
One  step  is  made  towards  understanding  why  her  is  two 
cases. 

The  final  t  of  //,  that,  and  what  is  a  sign  of  the  neuter 
gender,  and  corresponds  to  the  terminal  consonant  in 
Sansk.,  tat,yat ;  Lat.,  id,  quid,  quod,  illud,  istud. 

The  instrumental  or  ablative  cases  of  Nos.  2  and  3  are 
entirely  lost ;  but  why,  the  corresponding  case  of  the  inter- 
rogative pronoun,  is  still  in  use. 

"  And  thy  ilcan  geare  sende  Aethelwulf  cyning  Aelfred  his 
sunne  to  Rome." 

(And  in  that  same  year  King  Ethelwulf  sent  Alfred  his  son  to 
Rome.) 

"  Ac  thses  wundredan  men,  na  forthi  thaet  hit  mare  wundor 
wsere,  2uc  forthi  ih'ieX  hit  wses  ungewunelic." 

(But  men  wondered  at  this,  not  for  this  that  it  was  more  won- 
der, hViX  for  this  that  it  was  uncommon.) 

-^LFRic's  "  Homily  on  the  Loaves  and  the  Fishes." 

"For  thy  great  Mammon  fayrely  he  besought." 
"  For  thy  the  first  did  in  the  forepart  sit." 

"  Faerie  Queene,"  book  ii. 

We  still  have  a  representative  of  this  old  word  in  such 
phrases  as  the  sooner  the  better,  the  longer  here  the  later 
there. 


320  English  Grammar. 

*'  I  love  not  man  f^e  less  but  Nature  more." 

In  these  instances  tke  differs  from  the  so-called  article, 
and  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  eo  in  eo  magis,  eo  melius,  by 
so  much  more,  better,  etc. 

The  forms  with  a  superadded  s — ours,  yours,  theirs,  hers — 
its — are  relatively  modern.  Of  these  its  is  the  youngest, 
not  used  by  Spenser  or  recognized  in  the  grammars  of  Ben 
Jonson  and  Alexander  Gill.  Until  well  into  the  seven, 
teenth  century  his  was  still  in  common  use. 

"  Learning  hath  his  infancy  when  it  is  beginning,  and  almost 
childish  ;  then  his  youth,  when  it  is  luxuriant  and  juvenile  \ 
then  his  strength  of  years,  when  it  is  solid  and  reduced  ;  and 
lastly  his  old  age." — Bacon  :  "  Essay,"  58. 

Spenser  sometimes  has  her  : 

"  For  every  substance  is  conditioned 
To  chaunge  her  hew,  and  sundry  forms  to  don, 
Meet  for  her  temper  and  complexion." 

"  Faerie  Queene,"  iii.,  6,  38. 

The  Bible  avoids  the  new  word  by  means  of  his  and 
thereof — "  the  fruit  tree  yielding  fruit  after  his  kind  ;  "  the 
laver  and  his  foot  " ;  "a  cubit  shall  be  the  length  thereof, 
and  a  cubit  the  breadth  thereof''  In  King  James's  Bible, 
Leviticus  xxv.,  5  reads  thus : 

"  That  which  groweth  of  //  owne  accord  of  thy  haruest,  thou 
shalt  not  reape,  neither  gather  the  grapes  of  thy  Vine  vndressed  ; 
for  it  is  a  yeare  of  rest  vnto  the  land." 

There  was  an  opportunity  for  a  precisely  similar  expres- 
sion in  Acts  xii.,  10  : 

"  they  came  unto  the  iron  gate  that  leadeth  unto  the  city  ; 
which  opened  to  them  of  his  own  accord." 

This  is  curiously  like  a  passage  in  the  "  Faerie  Queene," 
book  ii.,  canto  2  : 

"  they  came  unto  an  yron  dore, 
Which  to  them  opened  of  his  own  accord." 


Pronouns,  321 

The  coincidence,  however,  becomes  less  striking  when  we 
find  that  both  are  imitations  of  Tyndale. 

Hit  or  it  as  a  possessive,  although  not  very  common,  is  less 
exceptional  than  one  might  suppose. 

"  hit  is  demed  euer-more, 
For  hit  dede3  of  dethe  duren  there  3et." 

(it  is  doomed  evermore. 
For  its  deeds  of  death  endure  there  yet.) 

"  Alliterative  Poems,"  1360. 

"  and  that  there  thou  leav6  it, 
(Without  more  mercy)  to  //  owne  protection." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Winter's  Tale,"  2,  3. 

"  It  hath  //  originall  from  much  griefe." — "  Henry  IV.,"  i,  3. 
"  Of  it  owne  fall."—"  Timon,"  act  2. 

"  The  Coarse  they  follow,  did  with  desperate  hand 
Fore  do  /'/  owne  life." — "  Hamlet,"  5,  i. 

"  Of  it  owne  colour  and  mooues  with  //  owne  organs." 

"  Ant.  and  Cleop.,"  2,  7. 

"  The  Hedge  Sparrow  fed  the  Cuckoo  so  long  that  it  's  had  // 
head  bit  off  by  it  young." — "  Lear,"  i,  4. 

Rare  instances  of  this  kind  are  to  be  found  down  to  the 
time  of  Addison  and  Steele. 

"  unless  a  young  wood  spring  up  from  //  roots." 

Spectator y  No.  584. 

It  was  not  uncommon  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries  to  write  it's  instead  of  its ;  and  that  is  the  form 
sanctioned  by  the  authors  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  art.  i.,  sec.  10,  par.  2. 

He  and  she  being  the  principal  signs  of  gender  in  the 
language  are  employed  as  adjectives  to  denote  the  sex, 
especially  of  animals : 

"  behold  an  ^^-goat  came  from  the  west  on  the  face  of  the 
whole  earth." 

"  And  there  came  forth  two  .r^<f-bears  out  of  the  wood  and  tare 
forty  and  two  children  of  them.' 


322  English  Grammar. 

There  is  a  careless  usage,  not  at  all  to  be  commended,  of 
employing  a  personal  pronoun  as  a  noun,  admitting  of 
adjectives  and  adjective  pronouns. 

"  I  have  seen  more  eloquence  in  a  look  from  one  of  these 
despicable  creatures,  than  in  the  eye  of  the  fairest  she  I  ever 
saw." — Spectator y  No.  6ii. 

The  English  language  is  not  rich  in  pronouns,  and  there 
are  few  careful  writers  or  speakers  who  have  not  felt  the 
want  of  more.  One  of  these  wants  is  a  pronoun  of  the  third 
person,  as  destitute  of  number  and  gender  as  who  or  which. 
Our  Saxon  fathers,  like  the  Germans,  used  man  as  a  pro- 
noun, just  as  the  French  use  on,  which  is  a  residual  of 
hommCf  a  man.  The  Germans  have  Man  sagt,  just  as  the 
French  have  on  dit,  where  our  modern  phrase  is  they  say, 
people  say,  or  it  is  said.  In  earlier  stages  of  our  language 
man  often  became  mon,  men,  or  me. 

"for  with  pouerte  and  with  wa  schal  mon  wele  buggen." 
(for  with  poverty  and  with  woe  shall  any  one  buy  bliss.) 
"Wooing  of  our  Lord,"  a.d.,  1210. 

"  For  me  hi  halt  lothlich  and  fule." 
(For  folk  hold  it  loathsome  and  foul.) 

"Owl  and  Nightingale,"  1250. 

Shakespeare  often  uses  <z  as  a  substitute  for  he,  she,  etc. 

"  You  '11  nere  be  friends  with  him,  a  kild  your  sister." 
"  Who  ere  a  was  a  shew'd  a  mounting  minde." 

"  Loves  Labour  's  Lost,"  4,  i. 

At  present  we  employ  a  number  of  substitutes  for  a  com- 
mon pronoun,  of  which  the  principal  are  we,  you,  they,  and 
one,  in  such  sentences  as : 

We  are  likely  to  have  frost  to-night. 

You  cannot  expect  the  wisdom  of  age  from  one  so  young. 

They  say  that  gold  has  been  found  on  Mill  Brook. 

Here  the  pronouns  do  not  refer  to  any  particular  persons. 


Pronouns.  323 

But  the  greatest  need  for  a  common  pronoun  is  in  re- 
ferring back  to  some  indefinite  person  already  mentioned. 
Take  a  sentence  like  the  following. 

If  the  purchaser  of  a  house  should  find  a  hidden  treasure  in  it, 
would  it  belong  to  him  ? 

Obviously  the  purchaser  might  be  a  woman  or  a  corporation, 
in  which  case  him  would  be  inapplicable.  Hence  arise  such 
inelegant  verbosities  as  ke  or  she,  to  him,  her,  or  them,  or  either 
of  them.  In  such  cases  Addison  would  have  used  a  plural 
pronoun,  although  referring  only  to  a  singular.  Some  one 
finds  a  handkerchief  and  goes  about  "  asking  everybody  if 
they  had  dropped  it."  And  again  :  *'  I  do  not  think  any  one 
to  blame  for  taking  care  of  their  health." — Spectator,  No.  25. 
So  also  Hume:  "As  he  had  now  reached  the  twenty-third 
year  of  his  age,  it  was  natural  to  think  of  choosing  him  a 
queen  ;  and  each  party  was  ambitious  of  having  him  receive 
one  from  their  hand."  In  the  stricter  language  of  the  present 
day  these  sentences  would  be  incorrect. 

//  is  often  used  indefinitely,  and  apparently  without  mean- 
ing or  necessity. 

//  is  a  pity  that  so  many  young  persons  are  growing  up  without 
acquiring  the  means  of  earning  a  living. 

What  does  it  represent  here  ?  What  is  a  pity  ?  Why,  it 
is  the  fact  or  state  of  things  described. 

It  is  all  over  with  him. 

Query.     What  is  all  over  with  him  ? 

Ans.    Everything  in  this  world  is  over  with  him.    He  is  dead. 

//  is  raining.     //  is  going  to  snow. 

We  do  not  imagine  any  particular  thing  that  is  raining  or 
going  to  snow.  It  is  merely  a  habit  of  language  that  has 
become  a  necessity.  The  ancient  Romans  appeared  to  say 
such  things  in  single  words — pluit,  ningit — but  the  appear- 
ance was  deceptive.  The  final  t  is  the  equivalent  of  our  it. 
English  has  no  separate  reflexive  pronoun — that  is,  one 
placed  after  the  verb  when  the  actor  and  the  person  or  thing 


324  English  Grammar. 

acted  on  are  the  same.  The  word  suicide  may  be  divided  into 
two  parts — sui-cide — of  which  the  first  is  the  Latin  reflexive 
pronoun  and  the  second  the  verb  to  strike  or  kill — self-killing. 
The  slayer  and  the  slain  are  one.  Sanskrit  had  no  true  re- 
flexive pronoun,  but  employed  a  noun  instead.  It  had, 
however,  an  emphatic  or  intensive  pronoun,  sva-yam,  of 
which  the  first  half  is  the  essential  part,  when  it  was  in- 
tended to  mark  out  a  person  very  prominently.  This  sva 
became  the  Greek  ov,  e,  and  the  Latin  sui,  se.  It  found  its 
way  into  most  of  the  Teutonic  tongues,  but  was  wanting  in 
Anglo-Saxon  from  an  early  period,  and  consequently  in 
English.  Everywhere  it  is  without  the  nominative ;  for 
when  one  betrays  himself,  this  little  word  represents  him, 
not  as  the  betrayer,  but  as  the  betrayed.  It  is  represented 
in  modern  High  German  by  sich,  in  Dutch  by  zich,  and  in 
Danish  and  Swedish  by  sig.  Our  substitute  for  this  word  is 
self,  always  combined  with  the  personal  pronouns.  This 
compound  performs  double  duty,  as  will  be  readily  under- 
stood by  one  who  knows  the  difference  between  the  Lat.  se 
and  ipsi.  If  I  say  I  fell  and  hurt  myself,  the  word  is  used 
reflexively,  the  action  coming  back  upon  the  actor.  But  in 
the  sentence,  I  saw  it  tnyself,  the  word  corresponds  to  ipse 
and  reinforces  the  nominative  /.  The  true  reflexive  pronoun, 
where  found,  is  confined  to  the  third  person,  and  has  no 
distinction  of  number  or  gender. 

The  want  of  the  reflexive  deprives  us  of  a  very  convenient 
adjective  pronoun  that  might  have  been  derived  from  it.  In 
place  of  our  single  word  his,  Latin  has  illius,  istius,  ipsius, 
hujuSy  ejus,  and  suus,  all  somewhat  different,  the  last  being 
reflexive.  It  is  some  compensation,  however,  that  with  our 
slender  stock  we  are  able  to  distinguish  between  his  and  hers, 
which  would  have  puzzled  Cicero  and  Quintilian,  with  all 
their  wealth  of  words. 

The  absence  of  a  reflexive  is  also  one  reason  why  our  lan- 
guage has  never  developed  a  passive  voice  for  any  of  its 
verbs.  French,  Spanish,  and  Italian  make  their  verbs  reflex- 
ive and  then  passive  by  preposing  or  appending  the  pronoun 
se.    The  characteristic  of  the  Latin  passive  is  r,  which  is  held 


Pronouns.  325 

to  be  the  initial  letter  of  the  same  se,  changed  to  r,  as  so 
often  occurs.  The  Russian  language  does  the  same  by  ap- 
pending to  the  verb  sya,  an  abbreviation  of  the  pronoun 
sebya — compare  the  Sanskrit  sva — govarit,  he  says  ;  gova- 
ritsya,  it  is  said.  So  the  Norse  or  Icelandic  forms  a  reflexive 
by  adding  sk^  a  shortening  of  sik — frelsa,  to  free  ;  frelsask, 
to  escape. 

Myself,  yourself,  etc.,  are  everywhere  made  by  combining 
a  personal  or  a  possessive  pronoun  with  the  emphatic  ele- 
ment self  The  origin  of  this  word  is  uncertain.  Clearly  it 
is  the  same  with  the  Gothic  silba  or  selba,  possibly  made  up 
of  the  se,  just  considered,  and  lib,  or  liba,  having  the  sense 
of  life  or  living  body.  It  has  also  been  a  matter  of  question 
whether  the  word  should  be  reckoned  a  noun,  an  adjective, 
a  pronoun,  or  an  adverb,  a  question  of  really  little  import- 
ance as  words  pass  insensibly  from  one  class  to  another.  It 
is  a  noun  when  used  singly  or  preceded  by  an  adjective. 

"  Self  is  an  eloquent  advocate." — Maclin. 

"  personal  identity  can  by  us  be  placed  in  nothing  but  conscious- 
ness (which  is  that  alone  which  makes  what  we  call  self)." 

Locke  :  "  Human  Understanding." 

"  Agis  who  saw 
Even  Sparta's  self  to  servile  avarice  sunk." 

Thompson. 
"  The  ministers  for  the  purpose  hurried  thence 
Me,  and  thy  crying  selfe." 

Shakespeare  :  *'  Tempest." 

Self  is  an  adjective  when  it  precedes  a  noun. 

"  In  all  service  and  execution,  he  showed  the  self  boldness  and 
courage  that  Hannibal  did." — North's  "  Plutarch." 

"  Love  did  us  both  with  one  self  arrow  strike." 

It  is  an  adverb  when  it  precedes  an  adjective. 

"  The  selfsame  authors  do  affirm." — Holland's  "  Plinie." 
"  In  the  ^<?^same  day  entered  Noah,  and  Shem,  and  Ham,  and 
Japheth." — Gen.  vii.,  13. 


326  English  Grammar. 

It  is  a  pronoun  only  in  combination  with  pronouns.  The 
selfy^zs,  long  written  separately  from  the  personal  pronoun, 
and  began  to  be  joined  to  it  in  the  fourteenth  century. 
During  the  five  hundred  years  when  English  underwent  its 
greatest  changes  these  compound  pronouns  took  a  great 
variety  of  forms,  among  which  were :  me  sylf,  my  selve,  us 
seolf,  us  self,  ourself,  ouszelves,  you  self,  he  seolf  hemself, 
himselven,  their  selfes,  their  selves,  them  selfe,  themselfe.  Out 
of  this  confusion  emerged  a  compromise — like  most  com- 
promises— inconsistent,  but  for  the  present  fairly  well  estab- 
lished. 

SINGULAR  PLURAL 

I  St  person,  myself  ourselves 

2d  person,  thyself,  yourself  yourselves 

f  himself  ] 
3d  person,  X  herself   V  themselves 

(  itself      ) 

Five  of  these  forms,  being  those  of  the  ist  and  2d  persons, 
unite  a  possessive  pronoun  with  self,  as  with  a  noun.  Himself 
and  themselves  attach  the  second  part  to  what  is  now  called  the 
objective,  formerly  a  dative  case.  This  may  be  due  in  part 
to  an  imitation  of  French  expressions  like  hii  mhne.  Her- 
self and  itself  are  ambiguous,  but  may  be  considered  as 
formed  on  the  model  of  himself  The  prevailing  construc- 
tion then  of  self  is  as  a  noun  preceded  by  an  adjective  or  a 
possessive.  The  two  exceptions  would  be  overcome  by 
rendering  the  expressions  still  more  emphatic.  We  might 
say  : 

his  own  great  self,  not  him  own  great  self  ; 

their  wise  selves,  not  t/iem  wise  selves. 
The  admission  of  a  plural  makes  self  a.  noun  and  not  an 
adjective.  We  also  admit  of  whose  self  and  one's  self  No- 
body ventures  on  whomself ;  and  although  oneself  is  met 
with,  it  is  against  the  analogy  and  prevailing  usage  of  the 
language. 

Kings  and  their  representatives  alone  employ  the  peculiar 
form  ourself. 


Pronouns.  327 

There  is  no  separate  objective  case,  but  a  possessive  is 
formed  by  substituting  own  for  self  or  selves,  in  which  case 
the  pronominal  part  is  always  possessive — my  own,  his  own, 
their  own.  This  own,  is  a  past  participle  of  owe^  to  possess, 
for  which  we  now  use  exclusively  the  strengthened  form 
own. 

THE   INTERROGATIVE    PRONOUN. 

The  root  of  the  interrogative  pronoun  is  in  Sanskrit  ka, 
which  becomes  in  Greek  no  and  ito  ;  Latin,  quo  ;  Goth,  and 
A.-S.,  hva ;  Eng.,  wha  and  who.  The  distinction  of  gender 
began  to  fail  in  Gothic ;  Saxon  and  English  do  not  distin- 
guish between  masculine  and  feminine.  T  is  throughout 
a  sign  of  the  neuter.     The  A.-S.  declension  was : 


MASC.   AND   FEM. 

NEUTER. 

NOM. 

hwd 

hwaet 

Gen. 

hwaes 

hwaes 

Dat. 

hwdm 

hwam 

Accus. 

hwone 

hwaet 

Instr. 

hwy 

hwy 

Of  these  forms  we  have  now  entirely  dropped  the  Accus. 
hwone,  and  all  the  others  have  been  more  or  less  changed  or 
disguised.  We  place  the  w  before,  but  still  pronounce  it 
after  the  h.  For  hwd  we  write  who  and  say  hu,  although  I 
have  many  a  time  heard  it  pronounced  hwo ;  and  in  the 
straths  and  glens  of  Scotland  it  is  still  called  hwa.  For 
hw<2s  we  write  whose,  disguising  its  possessive  character  by 
adding  e  after  s,  and  we  call  it  hooz.  As  usual  with  pro- 
nouns, we  substitute  the  dative  for  the  accusative,  write 
whom  and  pronounce  it  hoom.  These  are  never  used  as 
adjectives  with  nouns,  and  they  apply  only  to  persons. 
What — from  hwoet — without  a  noun  retains  its  neuter  char- 
acter, but  used  adjectively  is  applicable  to  either  persons  or 
things. 

"  What  light  is  that  ? " 
"  or  what  king,  going  to  war  against  another  king,"  etc. 

*  The  sense  of  indebtedness  comes  from  the  possession  of  a  thing  not  paid  for. 


328  English  Grammar. 

The  instrumental  hwy,  by  what,  or  by  what  means,  becomes 
the  adverb  why. 

From  the  interrogative  we  have  two  derivative  pronouns, 
whether  and  which,  also  the  adverbs  how,  when,  where, 
whither,  whence.  Whether,  having  the  old  dual  termination 
er,  is  which  of  the  two.  Which  was  originally  formed  by 
adding  He,  like,  to  the  instrumental  hwy,  or  hwi,  and  was 
thus  equivalent  to  the  Latin  qualis,  of  what  kind.  It  be- 
came in  A.-S.  hwilc  or  hwelc ;  and  in  the  course  of  its  trans- 
formation h  and  w  changed  places,  /  was  dropped  out,  and 
c  became  ch.  The  ancient  word  may  perhaps  still  be  heard 
in  Scotland. 

'*  Whilk  cause  is  the  best  I  cannot  say." — Scott. 

Which  has  but  one  form  for  all  occasions,  is  either  singu- 
lar or  plural,  and  is  used  with  or  without  a  noun.  While 
who  implies  no  knowledge  of  the  person  inquired  about, 
which  refers  to  the  undetermined  member  of  an  aggregate 
known  collectively. 

*'  and  he  said,  I  have  an  errand  to  thee,  O  captain.  And 
Jehu  said,  Unto  which  of  all  of  us  ?  And  he  said,  To  thee,  O 
captain." — 2  Kings  ix.,  5. 

RELATIVE   PRONOUNS. 

Interrogative  pronouns  may  pass  imperceptibly  into  a 
usage  in  which  there  is  no  trace  of  an  interrogation.  In 
conversing  about  a  picture,  for  example,  the  very  same 
words  in  the  same  order  may  occur  in  several  sentences, 
shading  off  from  a  distinct  question  to  no  question  at  all : 

Who  painted  it  ? 

I  wish  to  know  who  painted  it. 

I  do  not  know  who  painted  it. 

Here  is  the  son  of  the  artist  who  painted  it. 

In  the  last  example  who  is  said  to  be  a  relative  pronoun 
and  to  relate  to  the  preceding  noun,  artist,  which  is  called 
the  antecedent — that  which  goes  before.     Who,  what,  which 


Pronouns.  329 

were  interrogatives  before  they  were  relatives,  and  began 
to  assume  the  latter  character  in  the  twelfth  century.  There 
were,  however,  other  and  older  relatives. 

The  nature  of  a  relative  pronoun  can  be  made  clearer  by 
a  few  examples  than  by  any  definition  : 

1.  "  There  was  a  man  in  our  town 

And  he  was  wondrous  wise." 

Here  are  two  distinct  statements  connected  by  and,  two 
subjects,  man  and  he,  and  the  verb  was  repeated. 

2.  "  There  was  a  man  in  our  town 

Who  was  wondrous  wise." 

In  this  instance,  as  in  most,  who  =  and  he. 

3.  "  There  was  a  wondrous  wise  man  in  our  town." 

Only  one  proposition,  subject,  and  verb.  Many  relative 
clauses,  but  not  all,  can  be  put  into  the  first  form,  but  if  we 
had  sufficient  adjective  power,  all  could  be  expressed  in  the 
third. 

"  He  was  the  only  candidate  who  was  accepted," 
is  not  the  same  as 

"  He  was  the  only  candidate,  and  he  was  accepted." 
It  is  equivalent  to 

"  He  was  the  only  candidate  accepted.'' 
Again  : 

"  There  was  no  one  there  who  could  swim," 
cannot  be  put  into  the  form  : 

**  There  was  no  one  there,  and  he  could  swim  "  ; 
but  we  might  say  : 

"  There  was  no  one  there  able  to  swim." 

But  relative  clauses,  put  into  the  form  of  adjectives,  would 
sometimes  be  lengthy  and  cumbrous,  and  placed  after  the 
noun,  and  so  contrary  to  the  genius  of  the  language.     The 


330  English  Grammar. 

Germans  have  a  habit  of  making  up  long  adjective  phrases, 
which  may  be  illustrated  by  a  close  translation  of  ^Lpart  of 
a  sentence  from  Friedrich  Schlegel,  combining  the  parts  of 
each  phrase  by  hyphens  : 

"  The  harmonious  majesty  of  the  opposite-standing  Magdalen, 
whose  consummate  beauty  in  the  toward-the-beholder-iurned  feat- 
ures, is  strikingly  like  to  the  Dresden  Madonna,  reminds  us  of 
the  sweet  harmony  of  the  in-eternal-beatiiude-blessed  spirits,  which 
in  the  magic  tones  of  earthly  music," 

and  so  on  to  the  end  of  the  sentence,  that  is,  of  the  page. 
Now  if  we  had  this  habit,  we  might  dispense  at  will  with 
relative  pronouns,  although  it  is  not  clear  that  our  style 
would  be  thereby  improved.     Thus  instead  of  saying  : 

"  There  are  still  traces  of  the  canal  which  was  cut  by  Xerxes 
across  Mount  Athos," 

we  could  say : 

"  There  still  are  traces  of  the  by-Xerxes-across-Mount-Athos-cut 
canal." 

Relative  pronouns  save  us  from  such  lumbering  expressions, 
and,  with  the  help  of  a  second  verb,  dexterously  turn  a  sen- 
tence into  a  new  direption,  from  which  it  may  be  again 
deflected  into  a  third. 

What  and  which  as  relatives  differ  a  little  from  the  same 
words  as  interrogatives.  By  a  kind  of  poetic  license  which 
takes  the  possessive  whose, 

"  that  sweet  bird  whose  music  was  a  storm." 

Shelley. 
"  The  sunken  glen  whose  sunless  shrubs  must  weep." 

Byron. 

What  has  the  peculiarity  of  being  both  antecedent  and  rela- 
tive— equal  to  that  which.  Which  and  what  are  sometimes 
used  with  nouns,  but  oftenest  without. 

"  What  books  he  wished,  he  read  : 
What  sage  to  hear,  he  heard  ;  what  scenes  to  see, 
He  saw." — Pollock's  "  Course  of  Time." 


Pronouns,  331 

The  quaint  old  phrase,  what  time,  meaning  at  that  time  when, 
is  found  only  in  poetry  : 

"  What  time  the  mighty  moon  was  gathering  light, 
Love  paced  the  thymy  plots  of  Paradise." 

Tennyson. 
Which  was  often  preceded  by  the  : 

"  In  the  which  ye  also  walked  sometime." — Col.  iii.,  7. 

More  curious  was  the  practice  of  requiring  the  three  words 
the  which  tliat  to  make  a  single  relative  pronoun. 

"  And  the  monstre  answerde  him,  and  seyde,  he  was  a  dedly 
creature,  suche  as  God  hadde  formed,  and  dwelled  in  the  des- 
ertes,  in  purchasynge  his  sustynance  ;  and  besoughte  the  here- 
myte,  that  he  wolde  preye  God  for  him,  the  whiche  that  cam  from 
hevene  for  to  saven  all  mankynde,  and  was  bom  of  a  mayden, 
and  suffred  passioun  and  dethe  (as  we  well  knowen)." — Sir  John 
Mandeville. 

It  has  been  already  said  that  the  interrogatives  were  not 
employed  as  relatives  until  the  twelfth  century.  What  and 
which  came  first,  and  Dr.  Morris  assures  us  that  who  was  not 
so  used  until  the  fourteenth,  nor  common  before  the  six- 
teenth. This  priority  of  which  explains  its  occurrence  in  old 
books  where  we  should  now  use  who.  There  are  probably 
persons  still  living  who  can  remember  the  first  sentence  of 
the  Lord's  Prayer — neither  an  error  nor  an  exception. 

"  But  Paul  said,  I  am  a  man  which  am  a  Jew  of  Tarsus. " — 
Acts  xxi.,  39. 

The  older  relatives  were :  first,  an  indeclinable  the  ;  second, 
the  pronoun  of  the  third  person  distinguished  (page  329)  as 
No.  2,  se,  seo,  thaet ;  third,  these  latter  combined  with  the  ; 
fourth,  swa,  equal  to  so  or  as.  In  the  Saxon  Chronicle 
King  Henry  acts 

"  be  thaere  rede  the  him  abuton  wseron." 
(by  their  rede  that  were  about  him.) 

"  Man  waes  fram  Gode  dsend  thces  nama  waes  Johannes." 
(There  was  a  man  sent  from  God  whose  name  was  John.) 

John  i.,  6. 


332  English  Grammar. 

"  Ne  geseah  naefre  nan  man  God,  buton  se  ancenneda  Sunu  hit 
cythde,  se  ys  on  hys  Faeder  bearme." 

(Not  saw  never  no  man  God,  unless  the  only  begotten  Son 
manifested  it,  who  is  in  his  Father's  bosom.) 

John  i.,  i8. 

"  He  toe  the  recless  &  te  blod, 
&  3ede  upp  to  thatt  allterr, 
Thatt  was  withthinnenn  wa3herifft." 
(He  took  the  incense  and  the  blood, 
And  went  up  to  that  altar, 
That  was  within  the  veil.) 

"Ormulum,"  1200. 

In  the  "  Lives  of  the  Saints  "  (1295)  occurs, 

"  thulke  hous  as  he  was  inne  ibore," 
(the  same  house  which  he  was  born  in)  ; 

and  Bishop  Bonner  (1538)  complains  of  Hooper  for  mis- 
quoting him — making  him  say :  "  the  same  as  was  hanged," 
instead  of,  "  the  same  that  was  hanged."  As  was  then 
beginning  to  go  out  of  fashion.  Still  it  sometimes  found  a 
place  in  literature  as  late  as  the  age  of  Queen  Anne. 

"  he  marches  up  and  attacks  their  main  body,  but  are  opposed 
again  by  a  party  of  men  as  lay,".etc. — Tatler^  1709. 

Steele,  in  the  Spectator,  with  the  ignorance  of  English 
philology  so  common  in  that  age,  presents  the  "  Humble 
Petition  of  Who  and  Which  against  the  upstart  Jack  Sprat, 
That,  now  trying  to  supplant  them."  The  truth  was,  they 
were  supplanting  That.  Perhaps  he  was  not  acquainted 
with  the  English  Psalter  of  1380. 

"  Blesse  thou,  my  soule,  to  the  Lord  !  and  wile  thou  not  for3ete 
all  the  3eldingus  of  him. 

That  hath  mercy  to  alle  thi  wickednessis  ;  that  helith  alle  thin 
infirmyties. 

That  a3en-bieth  fro  deth  thi  lif  ;  that  crowneth  thee  in  mercy 
and  mercy-doingis. 

That  fulfilleth  in  goode  thingus  thy  deseyr." 


Pronouns,  333 

In  all  ages  of  the  English  tongue  that  has  been  the  standard 
relative  of  the  body  of  the  people,  and  to  this  day  which  is 
stifl  and  formal,  suggestive  of  the  student's  lamp  or  the 
pedagogue's  birch.     Here  is  an  excellent  example ; 

"  This  is  the  cock  that  crew  in  the  mom, 
Unto  the  farmer  sowing  his  corn, 
That  met  the  priest  with  his  pen  and  ink-horn, 
That  married  the  man  so  tattered  and  torn, 
That  kissed  the  maiden  all  forlorn. 
That  milked  the  cow  with  the  crumpled  horn, 
That  tossed  the  dog,  that  worried  the  cat, 
That  killed  the  rat,  that  ate  the  malt, 
That  lay  in  the  house,  that  Jack  built." 

This  familiar  word  occurs  here  eleven  times  ;  and  to  replace 
it  by  which  and  ivho  would  destroy  the  rippling  rhythm  that 
has  delighted  the  young  ears  of  so  many  generations. 

ADJECTIVE  PRONOUNS. 

If  all  be  included  that  may  with  propriety  be  placed  in 
this  class,  it  becomes  a  very  large  one.  Its  limits  are  as 
usual  rather  arbitrary  ;  for  its  members  are  not  used  exclu- 
sively as  adjectives,  nor  are  they  the  only  ones  so  employed. 
Several  of  those  already  treated  of  are  often  associated  with 
nouns  in  the  manner  of  adjectives.  Indeed,  who  is  the  only 
pronoun  never  associated  with  a  noun.  The  pronouns  of 
the  first  and  second  persons  are  never  adjectives.  When 
followed  by  nouns,  the  former  is  the  leading  word  to  which 
the  latter  is  added.  It  is  not  the  pronoun  that  is  set  to  help . 
out  the  noun.  But  the  words  of  the  present  class  are 
habitually,  and  some  of  them  exclusively,  employed  with 
nouns.  I  shall  include  two  groups  not  very  generally 
treated  as  adjective  pronouns,  and  shall  make  five  sub- 
divisions. 

I.  What  are  commonly  called  demonstrative  pronouns,  as 
if  the  speaker  pointed  with  the  finger  at  the  thing  spoken 
of.  They  are  three  in  number — this,  with  its  plural  these ; 
that,  with  its  plural  those  ;  and  j^on  ox  yonder.    The  first  two 


334  English  Grammar. 

have  been  spoken  of  under  the  head  of  the  pronoun 
of  the  third  person.  Strictly,  this  refers  to  what  is 
near  the  speaker ;  that,  to  what  is  near  the  hearer ;  and 
yon  to  something  remote  from  both.  The  words  are  applied 
also  to  ideas,  opinions,  actions,  sayings,  etc.  When  two 
things  have  just  been  named  in  contrast,  the  first  is  referred 
to  as  that^  the  last  as  this. 

"  What  conscience  dictates  to  be  done, 
Or  warns  me  not  to  do, 
This^  teach  me  more  than  hell  to  shun, 
That,  more  than  heaven  pursue." 

Pope. 

Often  we  refer  to  something  we  are  going  to  say  as  this^ 
and  to  what  we  have  just  said  as  that. 

"  Never  break  a  bridge  you  yourself  'may  have  to  cross  :  re- 
member thaty 

"  Store  this  among  your  treasures  of  wisdom  :  If  you  cannot 
keep  your  own  secret,  do  not  expect  another  to  do  it." 

Like  the  Latin  iste,  this  is  sometimes  employed  to  impart 
a  shade  of  contempt : 

"  There  will  be  no  end  of  such  fantastical  writers  as  this  Mr. 
Harris,  who  takes  fustian  for  philosophy." 

Tooke's  "  Diversions  of  Purley." 
"  this  kind,  this  due  degree 
Of  blindness,  weakness,  heaven  bestows  on  thee." 

Pope  :  "  Essay  on  Man,"  i.,  233. 

On  the  other  hand  that  is  used  to  magnify  : 

"  When  languishing  with  love-sick  eyes, 
That  great,  that  charming  man  you  see." 

Addison  :  "  Rosamond,"  ii.,  6. 
"  There  Charles  confronted  the  High  Court  of  Justice  with  that 
placid  courage  which  has  half  redeemed  his  fame." 

Macaulay  :  "  Warren  Hastings." 

Yon  is  now  out  of  use  in  prose,  and  rare  in  poetry.  The 
later  form  yonder  is  frequent  in  prose  as  an  adverb  of  place  : 


Pronouns,  335 

"And  they  too  have  a  voice,  j(?«  piles  of  snow," 

Coleridge's  "  Hymn," 
"  "^^zx yonder  copse,  where  once  a  garden  smiled." 

Goldsmith's  "  Deserted  Village," 

Like  many  other  old  genuine  words,  yon  is  more  common 
in  Scotland  : 

"  There  's  auld  Rob  Morris  that  wins  m.yon  glen, 
He  's  the  king  o'  guid  fellows,  the  wale  o'  auld  men." 

Burns, 

II.  Two  little  words  that  have  not  much  in  common  are 
usually  made  into  a  class  by  themselves  and  called  Articles. 
They  are  an,  abbreviated  to  a  before  a  consonant  sound,  and 
the,  to  which  Dr.  Latham  would  add  no.  An  is  the  Saxon 
numeral  dn,  one,  fairly  well  preserved,  and,  as  remarked, 
sometimes  drops  the  n.  "  I  have  caught  a  fox,"  and  "  I 
have  caught  one  fox,"  state  precisely  the  same  fact ;  but  the 
latter  carries  an  implication  that  there  was  some  thought  of 
catching  more  than  one,  and  thus  lays  stress  on  the  number. 
It  is  very  clear  then  why  an  or  a  precedes  only  a  singular 
noun. 

Down  to  the  close  of  the  last  century  the  final  n  was  com- 
monly retained  before  the  sound  of  A ;  and  we  read  of  an 
house,  an  high  day,  an  hen,  an  hog,  an  heap.  At  present  the 
practice  is  to  drop  it  before  all  consonant  sounds,  including 
h,y,  and  zv  ;  excepting,  however,  words  beginning  with  h  and 
accented  on  the  second  syllable.  In  such  cases  the  h  is 
scarcely  heard. 

The  adjective  pronoun  no  is  merely  the  negative  of  the 
preceding.  One  of  the  forms  taken  by  the  first  numeral  in 
the  middle  ages  was  o  : 

"  Anon  he  let  two  cofres  make. 
Of  o  semblance  and  o  make," 

GOWER. 

Adding  to  this  the  n  of  the  negative  particle  ne,  makes  the 
compound  no.  A  fuller  form  is  none,  but  now  slightly  differ- 
ent grammatically.  Formerly  none,  like  any  was  used  before 
a  vowel. 


336  English  Grammar. 

"  He  maketh  the  devices  of  the  people  of  none  effect." 

Psalm  xxxiii.,  10. 

but  such  a  distinction  is  no  longer  observed. 

The  is  from  the  same  source  as  that.  Our  Saxon  ances- 
tors occasionally  employed  an  indeclinable  form  the,  but 
oftener  the  pronoun  se,  sea,  that,  varied  in  gender,  number, 
and  case  to  suit  the  noun  to  which  it  was  applied.  An,  or  a, 
no,  and  the  are  thus  weakened  substitutes  for  one,  no  one,  and 
that  or  those.  An  does  not  indicate  any  particular  one,  while 
the  relates  to  something  so  well  understood  that  its  identity 
is  not  likely  to  be  mistaken. 

"  I  hear  a  dog  barking  ";     "  I  hear  the  dog  barking." 

The  first  may  be  any  dog  ;  the  second  is  a  particular  animal 
well  understood  between  us. 

"  There  was  a  man  with  a  monkey  here  yesterday." 
"  There  is  the  man  with  the  monkey  again." 

Having  once  seen  and  spoken  of  him  he  is  now  familiar. 

III.  My,  thy,  her,  our,  your,  their,  are  C2iS\^e.di  possessive  pro- 
nouns, as  distinguished  from  the  possessive  cases  of  the  per- 
sonal pronouns.  They  are  of  course  originally  the  same. 
My  and  thy  are  shortened  forms  of  mine  and  thine,  in  the 
same  manner  as  ^  is  a  clipped  an.  The  Bible  says  "  mine 
house,"  "  thine  head."  The  possessive  pronouns  that  end  in 
r  are  original,  and  their  former  places  have  been  taken  by 
forms  with  an  added  s.  His  remains  the  same  for  both  pur- 
poses, as  it  does  not  readily  admit  of  a  second  s.  Its  is  now 
almost  exclusively  used  as  an  adjective  pronoun.  Speaking 
of  a  bird  we  might  say :  "  That  is  its  nest "  ;  we  should 
scarcely  ever  say  :  "  That  nest  is  its  "  /  yet  that  is  the  way 
in  which  Shakespeare  used  the  word : 

"  Each  following  day 
Became  the  next  dayes  master,  till  the  last 
Made  former  Wonders  iCs.** 

"  Henry  VHI.,"  i.,  i. 


Pronouns.  337 

The  words  of  this  and  the  preceding  subdivision  are  used 
only  before  nouns.  We  may  say,  "  This  is  our  house,"  but 
not,  "  This  house  is  our.' 

IV.  Numerals.  Words  denoting  number  are  commonly 
classed  among  adjectives,  but  with  a  misgiving  that  their 
position  is  insecure,  like  that  of  the  bats  among  the  birds 
and  beasts.  They  express  no  quality  or  characteristic,  ad- 
mit of  no  degrees  of  comparison,  and,  like  pronouns,  are 
"  names  for  everything." 

It  is  not  necessary  to  give  a  series  of  numerals,  as  they 
are  equally  well  known  to  everybody.  They  offer  an  ex- 
ample of  forms  remarkably  well  preserved  in  the  main,  yet 
occasionally  suffering  great  changes,  as  will  be  seen  by  the 
table  on  page  338,  of  the  first  twelve  in  several  languages 
of  the  Aryan  family.  The  first  column  is  a  conjectural 
original  from  which  all  the  others  may  be  supposed  to  be 
derived. 

The  Sanskrit  and  Gypsy  words  for  one  are  evidently  not 
from  the  source  common  to  all  the  others. 

The  s  or  cs,  added  to  several  of  the  first  numerals,  is  an 
inflectional  termination,  and  no  part  of  the  original  words. 
The  same  is  true  of  final  r,  or  the  doubled  consonant,  in 
Norse  or  Icelandic. 

The  d  in  the  Russian  od-in  is  excrescent. 

Two,  three,  and  six — a  multiple  of  two  and  three — are  the 
numbers  best  preserved.  Whether  or  not  this  has  any  con- 
nection with  the  mystic  character  often  attributed  to  the 
number  three  I  cannot  say.  The  cipher  3  is  still  the  same 
in  Sanskrit  and  in  European  books. 

Eleven  and  twelve  are  generally  one-ten,  two-ten ;  but  are 
constructed  on  a  different  principle  in  Lithuanian  and  the 
Teutonic  dialects.  This  is  most  readily  seen  in  Gothic. 
Bopp  is  no  doubt  correct  in  his  conjecture  that  the-/?/" is 
akin  to  the  English  leave,  left.  The  line  of  thought  would 
thus  be  ien-andone-left,  ten-and-two-left,  shortened  to  one- 
left,  two-left. 

In  third,  thirteen,  and  thirty  r  has  changed  places,  as  it 
often  does,  with  the  adjacent  vowel. 


338 


English  Grammar, 


93 

3 

4) 

3 

S 

O 

c 

a> 

> 

O 

2J 

3 
O 

% 

n< 

> 

0) 

,13 

4) 

.s 

3 

4> 

> 

I 

H 

o 

0; 

ys 

*m 

'w 

'a 

'u 

+-» 

z 

3 

3 

i 

o 
5 

c 

g 
»cj   to 

0) 

_« 

c 
0 

3 

.S 

d 

'o    3 

**  <5 

3    ri 

V    (U 

1) 

■«; 

-rt 

~— r^' 

»« 

vc 

'u3 

in 

ISl 

3 

'*-■ 

— r^- 

H 

C 

ki 

bi 

M 

s 

^ 

K 

C 

'S 

"S 

:| 

<J3 

X 

3 

C4 

rt 

^3 

.3 

^ 

^•^ 

O 

> 

A 

lU 

^ 

» 

'S 

^ 

V(H* 

in 

'«* 

^rt 

3 

'*-• 

4> 

s 

0 

en 

•3 

"3 

1 

> 

<J3 

in 

D 

C 

3 

3 

-M 

3 
3 

'S 

3 
3 

"d 

■3 

d 
> 

i-i 

3 

4) 

55 

'o   3 

g 

a 

W   3 

s 

0 
u 

6 
0 

lU 

6 

m 

3 

'0 

1 

3 

— . 

TJ 

r^' 

— ■ — 

0 

3 

TJ 

3 

13 

vn 

H 

JS 

CO 
2- CO 

CO 

« 

^3 

»co 

« 

CO 

CO 

0 

1 

O 

CO 

S"  s 

^ 

»4 

k> 

?v 

s 

'3 

'« 

» 

<a. 

K.  k 

'CO 

VJ> 

fe 

S 

;»> 

-co 

^ 

o 

<<) 

K> 

-'-i^ 

te 

»<o 

-co 

'O 

'(O 

«© 

tco 

<o 

^ 

d 

d 

< 

S 

•S 

c 

c< 

^ 

1n 

4) 

s 

a 
0 

d 

> 

d 

3 

d 
3 
■3 

■r) 

> 

•c 

^ 

>> 

,13 
in 

« 

m 

!> 

■-s 

> 

o 

t3 

u 

ex 

0 

13 

•73 

0 

t3 

^ 

d 

tuO 

52 

c3 

43 

lU 

d 

0) 

S 

c 

c4 

.M 

0 

0 

43 

"o 

rS 

(3 

1 

*^ 

o 

O 

•n 

U 

'3 

0 

0 

d 

'S 

0 

0 

d 

-o 

o 

u 

5) 

in 

0 

3 

-d 

d 

T3 

< 

in 

d 

d 

< 

S 
1- 

C 

<(U 

3 

en 

u 

•  f-4 

a 

IS 

in 

1) 

"S 

'S 

3 
1 

"b 

0) 

1 
'n 
0 

'0 

f 

M 
% 

3 

T3 

,:<! 

&, 

in 

Cll 

TJ 

-a 

TJ 

i 

*3 

5 

^ 

"5 

0 

_d 

"S 

in 

J: 

1) 

ID 

4) 

D 

-a 
"3 

>-. 

•Td 

o 

a, 

s 

4> 

0 

u 

-a 

>> 

-o 

d 

d 

Ui 

,3 

,3 

c« 

S< 

IH 

3 

0! 
.a 
0 

s 

1 

0! 

d 

d 

1 

J3 

d 

T3 
d 

^ 

M 

> 

•r^ 

^ 

rA 

,13 

d 

d 

,i<! 

> 

in 

4) 

T) 

•" 

u 

&i 

in 

cil 

3 

'O 

lU 

TJ 

3 

is 

d 

c4 

cj 

^ 

d 

& 

-ii! 
S 

1 

cil 

in 

3 

3 
d 
> 

3 

,3 

2 

^ 

3 

•c 

eS 

M 

,s 

d 

d 

3 

rt 

-e 

^ 

^ 

r^ 

01 

3 

"O 

•0 

Pronouns.  339 

The  ty  in  twenty,  thirty,  forty,  is  allied  to  the  Gothic  tigj'us, 
a  modified  form  of  taihun,  ten. 

Our  native  tongue  has  no  numeral  larger  than  thousand ; 
million,  billion,  etc.,  are  of  Latin  origin. 

The  numerals  here  considered,  whether  great  or  small,  are 
called  cardinal  numbers,  from  the  Latin  cardo,  or  better 
cardin,  a  hinge,  because  on  them  depend  and  turn  several 
other  series  in  which  number  is  the  chief  element.  Of  these 
derived  series  there  are  three,  one  of  which  properly  belongs 
here — first,  second,  third,  fourth,  fifth,  etc.  They  are  called 
ordinals,  because  they  show  only  the  order  of  succession  or 
arrangement.  It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  first  and  second 
are  not  derivations  of  one  and  two.  First  is  a  superlative 
from  fore,  and  second  is  from  the  Latin  sequor,  to  follow. 

The  second  derivative  series — single,  double,  triple,  quadru- 
ple— are  adjectives,  and  need  not  be  further  considered  here, 
The  third  are  adverbs — once,  twice,  thrice,  etc. 

There  are  many  other  words,  nouns  and  adjectives,  in- 
volving the  consideration  of  number,  such  as  hexagon,  pen- 
tagonal, dodecahedron,  but  they  do  not  belong  here. 

V.  Miscellaneous  adjective  pronouns  : 


all 

either 

ilk 

same 

any 

else 

latter 

several 

both 

enough 

many 

some 

certain 

every 

neither 

such 

divers 

few 

only 

sundry 

each 

former 

other 

Most  of  these  are  used  either  with  nouns  or  without,  but 
every  and  sundry  accompany  either  other  adjective  pronouns 
or  nouns.  Only  never  occurs  alone  as  a  pronoun,  but  it  may 
precede  or  follow  either  noun  or  pronoun.  When  joined 
with  a  noun  enough  generally  follows  it.  Certain  is  now 
scarcely  ever  used  alone,  but  formerly  was  less  confined  : 

"  But  before  that  certain  came  from  James,  he  did  eat  with  the 
Gentiles." — Gal.  ii.,  12. 

The  same  is  true  of  divers,  now  nearly  obsolete : 


340  English  Grammar. 

"  for  divers  of  them  came  from  far." — Mark  viii.,  3. 

"The  Gospel  is  everywhere  one,  though  it  be  preached  of 
divers. ' ' — T  ynd  ale. 

Ilk,  when  met  with  at  all,  is  without  a  noun.  It  meant 
the  same.  It  is  used  now  only  rarely  and  half  in  jest.  A 
man  is  said  to  be  of  /Aaf  ilk  when  his  name  and  that  of  his 
home  are  the  same,  as  Kinloch  of  Kinloch. 


MISCELLANEOUS   SUBSTANTIVE   PRONOUNS. 

Any,  every,  no,  and  some,  united  with  body,  one,  and  thing, 
yield  twelve  pronouns  used  as  nouns — anybody,  everybody, 
etc.  There  are  also  ought  and  its  negative  nought — equiva- 
lents of  anything  and  nothing.  It  is  not  uncommon  now  to 
prefer  the  spelling  aught  and  naught,  on  the  ground  that 
they  represent  the  A.-S.  dwiht  and  ndwiht,  and  that  such 
was  the  prevalent  spelling  for  some  centuries  after  the  lan- 
guage had  become  what  we  should  now  recognize  as  English. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  A.-S.  d  is  most  commonly  represented 
by  o  in  the  language  of  our  time,  thus  : 


dn 

one 

cald 

cold 

hdm 

home 

is 

ore 

crdw 

crow 

mal 

mole 

dth 

oath 

dran 

drone 

mar 

more 

bdld 

bold 

fdld 

fold 

na 

no 

bdn 

bone 

g^ 

go 

ra 

roe 

bat 

boat 

gdt 

goat 

sla 

sloe 

Moreover,  ought  is  spelled  with  0  in  the  very  careful  or- 
thography of  the  "  Ormulum,"  A.D.  1200,  and  in  the  "  Proverbs 
of  Hending,"  about  a  century  later.  Nought  occurs  in  the 
Bible  thirty-six  times  and  naught  three  times,  but  always 
with  the  distinction  that  the  former  has  the  meaning  of 
nothing,  and  the  latter  of  bad  or  worthless. 

"  Ye  have  sold  yourselves  for  nought,  and  ye  shall  be  redeemed 
without  money." — Isa.  lii.,  3. 

"  The  situation  of  this  city  is  pleasant,  as  my  lord  seeth  ;  but 
the  water  is  naught,  and  the  ground  barren." — 2  Kings  ii.,  19. 


Pronouns.  341 

"  It  is  naughty  it  is  naught,  saith  the  buyer  ;  but  when  he  is  gone 
his  way,  then  he  boasteth." — Prov.  xx.,14. 

Pronouns  are  nearly  all  native  words ;  the  exceptions 
being  certain,  divers,  several,  and  a  few  of  the  numerals. 

Many  of  the  foregoing  words  are  not  universally  regarded 
as  pronouns.  Indeed,  I  am  not  aware  that  all  have  ever 
been  so  grouped  before.  If,  as  I  believe,  words  are  all  the 
time  undergoing  changes,  so  slow  that  it  may  take  centuries 
to  make  the  change  clear  and  conspicuous,  there  must  be 
many  in  an  intermediate  and  doubtful  state,  so  that  it  is 
easier  to  say  what  they  were,  or  what  they  will  be,  than  to 
determine  what  they  are.  I  hope  that  to  loan  is  not  good 
English  yet,  although  very  common,  but  I  have  little  doubt 
that  within  a  hundred  years  loan  will  completely  displace 
lend. 

**  Nebuzar-adan  the  captain  of  the  guard  carried  away  certain 
of  the  poor  of  the  land  *  *  *  left  certain  of  the  poor  of  the 
land  for  vinedressers  and  for  husbandmen." — Jeremiah  lii. 

Nothing  could  be  left  more  uncertain  than  who  the  respective 
poor  persons  were.  Certain  is  here  precisely  equivalent  to 
some  ;  and  the  word  must  have  sunk  gradually  from  the  sense 
of  certitude,  as  an  adjective,  to  that  of  entire  indefiniteness 
as  a  pronoun.  There  are  no  doubt  words  now  losing  their 
individuality,  and  sinking  into  the  condition  of  being 
"names  for  everything."  As  an  example  of  this  kind. 
Professor  Earle  instances  the  word  thing.  There  is  certainly 
no  object  now  in  nature  or  art,  to  which  it  is  more  appro- 
priate than  to  another.  Originally  it  signified  a  public 
assembly  bearing  some  analogy  to  a  town  meeting.  We 
may  read  of  such  Things  in  the  old  Norse  Sagas,  and  find 
vestiges  of  them  in  the  name  of  Thingvalla,  in  Iceland,  and 
the  Tynwald,  in  the  Isle  of  Man.  But  among  our  Saxon 
ancestors,  even  before  the  Conquest,  it  had  obtained  a 
wider  range  of  indefiniteness  than  it  has  now. 

Another  of  these  half  pronominal  words  is  body,  not  only 
in   the   compounds  anybody,   nobody,  etc.,   but  also   alone. 


342  English  Grammar. 

Like  who,  it  is  confined  to  persons.  It  is  more  generally 
used  by  the  Scotch  than  by  the  rest  of  our  kindred.  If  the 
following  example  were  translated  into  Latin,  a  body  would 
be  everywhere  represented  by  a  pronoun. 

"  Gin  a  body  meet  a  body 
Comin'  through  the  rye, 
Gin  a  body  kiss  a  body, 
Need  a  body  cry  ? " 


CHAPTER  V. 
VERBS   AND   THEIR   SEVERAL   KINDS. 

Verbs  express  actions.  It  is  true  that  after  many  thousand 
years  of  growth  and  decay,  we  can  find  a  few  verbs  that  do 
not  readily  suggest  to  us  any  form  of  bodily  or  mental 
activity.  Such  are  forget,  neglect,  lose,  omit,  lie,  sleep ;  but 
nearly  all  such  words  can  be  traced  back  to  more  active 
ancestors.  We  shall  hereafter  find  reason  to  believe  that 
to  be — the  most  colorless  and  inexpressive  of  all  verbs — once 
conveyed  the  idea  of  doing  something.  Professor  Whitney 
says  of  the  remotest  accessible  verbal  roots  of  the  Aryan 
tongues,  "  that  they  are  limited  in  signification  to  a  single 
class  of  ideas,  the  physical  or  sensual,  the  phenomenal,  out 
of  which  the  intellectual  and  moral  develop  themselves." ' 
That  is,  every  verb  at  first  denoted  the  perceptible  action  of 
some  material  body.  So  we  shall  most  readily  reach  a  clear 
idea  by  taking  action  to  be  the  essential  characteristic  of  a 
verb ;  and  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  find,  what  is  found 
everywhere  else,  that  some  of  the  farthest  developments  lose 
sight  of  the  original  conception. 

It  is  often  said  that  the  essence  of  a  verb  is  to  assert  or 
declare,  but  this  seems  to  me  a  less  permanent  and  essential 
feature  than  the  other.  We  can  find  hundreds  of  assertions 
without  verbs,  and  verbs  that  assert  nothing.  A  snatch  from 
an  old  song  of  the  Buccaneers  of  the  Spanish  Main  ran  : 

"  Up  with  the  black  flag,  down  with  the  blue  ; 
Fire  on  the  main-top,_;fr^  on  the  bow. 
Fire  on  the  gun-deck,  ^r^  down  below." 

*  "  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,"  page  265. 
343 


344  English  Grammar. 

These  spirited  lines  make  no  assertion,  but  suggest  a  good 
deal  of  action.  So  questions  and  many  other  expressions 
do  not  assert. 

"  Oh  !  that  the  desert  were  my  dwelling-place, 
With  one  fair  spirit  for  my  minister." 

Byron's  "  Childe  Harold." 

This  is  the  expression  of  a  wish  without  any  verb  of  wish- 
ing, were  being  the  only  one  present,  which  does  not  assert 
that  anything  is  or  was  or  will  be.  In  the  sentence.  The 
rose  is  red,  the  adjective  red  is  a  more  important  part  of  the 
assertion  than  the  verb  is.  Many  languages  are  without  a 
word  signifying  merely  to  be,  to  exist ;  and  others,  like  the 
Hebrew  and  Arabic,  use  it  very  sparingly.  "  Every  beast  of 
the  forest  is  mine,  and  the  cattle  upon  a  thousand  hills"  is  a 
very  large  assertion,  but  the  only  verb  in  it  is  a  European 
interpolation.  There  is  a  passage  well  known  to  the  friends 
of  temperance  and  prohibition,  that  in  the  original  is  with- 
out a  verb : 

"Who  hath  woe?  who  hath  sorrow?  who  hath  contentions? 
who  hath  babbling  ?  who  hath  wounds  without  cause  ?  who  hath 
redness  of  eyes  ? 

"  They  that  tarry  long  at  the  wine." 

The  essential  idea  of  a  verb  is  sometimes  put  into  the 
form  of  a  noun.  Some  of  these  are  grammatically  mere 
nouns  like  stealth,  flattery,  forgiveness,  emulation,  blandish- 
ment. Although  derived  from  verbs,  they  are  not  verbs  in 
any  sense,  and  may  be  summarily  dismissed.  There  is  one, 
however,  ending  in  -ing,  so  directly  formed  from  the  verb 
that  it  may  be  regarded  as  almost  a  part  of  it — at  least  a 
true  verbal  noun :  "  the  writings,  of  the  Fathers  ";  "  from  the 
rising  of  the  sun  unto  \h.Q  going  down  of  the  same."  What 
is  very  commonly  called  the  infinitive  of  the  verb,  to  run,  to 
ride,  to  speak,  is  often  equivalent  to  a  verbal  noun,  as  will  be 
easily  seen  in  the  familiar  quotation, 

"  To  err  is  human,  to  forgive  divine." 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  345 

"  for  to  will  is  present  with  me  ;  but  to  perform  that  which  is  good 
I  find  not." 

There  are  thus  two  verbal  nouns. 

Again  the  verbal  idea  may  assume  the  form  of  an  ad- 
jective, or  of  a  word  partaking  in  various  degrees  of  the 
adjective  character.  Solicitous,  from  solicit,  responsive,  from 
respond,  are  mere  adjectives,  and  not  verbal  forms  ;  but  our 
language  has  two  real  hybrids.  The  first  invariably  ends  in 
ing,  and  being  an  adjective  admits  of  no  plural — "  a  running 
stream,"  "  the  lark  was  singing"  "  the  birds  are  singitig,"  "  the 
girls  were  singing  '  Old  Folks  at  Home,'  "  In  the  first  of  these 
examples  running  has  the  effect  only  of  an  adjective  ;  in  the 
others  singing  has  all  the  force  of  a  verb.  This  form  is 
called  a.  participle,  2iS  partaking  oi  the  characters  of  the  verb 
and  the  adjective.  It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  this  parti- 
ciple is  identical  in  form  with  the  verbal  noun  in  -ing.  Of 
this  more  will  be  said  hereafter.  Let  it  suffice  for  the 
present  that,  so  far  as  form  goes,  the  noun  is  the  original 
and  the  participle  a  mistaken  imitation.  There  is  another 
participle  whose  ending  is  not  uniform,  but  is  in  a  majority 
of  instances  -ed — roasted  chestnuts,  painted  ceilings,  frozen 
lakes,  bound  volumes.  Of  these  two  participles  the  first  is 
connected  with  the  actor  or  doer,  represents  the  action  as  in 
progress,  going  on,  and  consequently  incomplete  ;  the  sec- 
ond connects  the  action  with  the  person  or  thing  acted 
upon,  and  represents  it  as  finished.  The  first  is  commonly 
said  to  be  present  and  active,  the  latter  past,  or  perfect  and 
passive.  Perfect,  in  grammar,  signifies  completed  action, 
and  passive  suffering  or  undergoing.  In  "  The  boy  is  stoning 
the  robins,"  the  actor  is  put  forward  and  made  conspicuous ; 
but  if  we  say,  "  The  robins  are  stoned  by  the  boy,"  promi- 
nence is  given  to  the  sufferers.  This  is  the  difference  be- 
tween the  active  and  the  passive  forms  of  verbs.  Besides 
the  two  simple  participles,  there  are  several  compound  parti- 
cipial expressions,  such  as,  being  writing,  being  about  to  writer 
having  been  writing,  having  written,  having  been  written,  etc. 
To  the  number  and  variety  of  these  there  is  no  precise  limit. 


34^  English  Grammar. 

Verbs  are  divided  into  several  classes  upon  a  variety  of 
grounds  quite  independent  of  each  other,  sometimes  from 
their  meaning  and  sometimes  with  sole  reference  to  their 
forms.  And  first,  as  to  signification.  The  leading  distinc- 
tion is  between  verbs  expressing  actions  which  begin  and 
end  with  the  actor  and  those  that  directly  involve  another. 
The  actor  is  called  in  grammatical  language  the  subject ;  the 
person  or  thing  he  acts  upon,  the  object.  In  the  sentence, 
**  The  hunter  killed  a  bear,"  the  hunter  is  subject  and  the 
bear  object.  To  sleep,  to  smile,  to  shudder,  to  yawn,  and 
many  others  take  no  object.  Those  that  take  an  object  are 
called  transitive — a  word  that  means  passing  over.  When  a 
bad  boy  pelts  a  homeless  cat,  the  act  of  pelting  is  conceived 
of  as  passing  from  the  little  barbarian  to  the  friendless  ani- 
mal. But  when  the  young  savage  lies  down  and  sleeps, 
these  actions  are  confined  to  himself,  and  do  not  pass  over 
to  another.  Verbs  that  thus  have  no  object  are  called 
intransitive.  Transitive  verbs  have  an  active  and  a  passive 
side ;  intransitives  have  only  the  forms  of  the  active.  A 
great  number  of  verbs  generally  intransitive  may,  by  one 
or  another  contrivance,  be  used  transitively.  One  may  walk, 
run,  or  sit  a  horse,  Jly  a  kite,  or  sweat  coin.  The  Lord 
rained  bread  from  heaven  (Exod.  xvi.,  4),  and  a  tree  may 
snow  its  fragrant  blossoms  on  the  ground.  While  a  few 
verbs  remain  exclusively  transitive  or  intransitive,  the  greater 
number  may  be  either.  A  few  verbs  originally  single  have, 
by  a  change  of  vowel,  been  split  into  pairs,  each  pair  con- 
taining usually  a  transitive  and  an  intransitive. 


brood 

breed 

rise 

raise 

deem 

doom 

sit 

set 

fall 

fell 

stoop 

steep 

lie 

lay 

drink 

drench 

Besides  the  direct,  verbs  often  have  an  indirect  object,  to 
or  for  whom  a  thing  is  done.  Sing  tne  a  song.  Tell  Jiim  the 
story.  Show  Ada  the  pictures.  It  is  sometimes  said  that 
the  little  word  to  is  understood  before  the  words  here 
italicized ;  but   what   are   we   to    understand   by  its  being 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  347 

so  understood  ?  In  languages  that  have  a  considerable 
supply  of  cases,  one  is  chiefly  set  apart  for  the  indirect 
object.  The  above  words  would  have  been  in  the  dative 
case,  so  long  as  we  had  one,  but  without  any  to.  Now, 
when  that  case  is  lost  we  often  indicate  the  same  relation  by 
to,  that  we  may  avoid  ambiguity.  In  the  usual  expressions 
there  is  not  an  original  to  omitted  ;  but  in  the  amended 
phrases  a  particle  is  inserted. 

Some  languages  abound  in  verbs  whose  action  returns 
upon  the  actor,  as  the  boomerang  is  fabled  to  do.  These 
are  called  reflexive,  or  backward-turning  verbs.  Such  are  the 
probable  originals  of  the  Sanskrit  and  Greek  middle  voice, 
and  of  all  passive  forms.  With  the  help  of  well-preserved 
pronouns,  the  Italian,  Spanish,  and  French  employ  a  great 
number  of  reflexive  expressions. 

Dar«  a  far  qualche  cosa  To  undertake  something 

Intended/  della  pittura  To  understand  painting 

Ribellarj/  To  rebel 

Se  lo  han  comido  los  mosquitos  The  mosquitoes  have  eaten  him 

up 

Ir  se  To  go  away 

Venir  se  To  come  away 

.S<?  promener  To  take  a  walk 

Se  servir  To  make  use  of 

S*  enrhumer  To  take  cold 

English  has  no  reflexive  forms,  for  reasons  suggested  under 
the  head  of  personal  pronouns.  It  is  true  that  one  can 
do  but  few  things  to  others  that  he  cannot  do  to  himself ; 
he  can  hurt,  deceive,  or  give  himself  away,  but  we  have 
few  words  to  express  what  one  can  do  only  to  himself.  Be- 
think, betake,  and  behave  make  up  the  list.  The  last  is  some- 
times used  as  an  intransitive,  but  the  older  and  prevailing 
usage  is  reflexive : 

"  thou  behaued'st  thy  selfe,  as  if  thou  hadst  beene  in  thine 
owne  Slaughter-house." — Shakesp.  :  2  "  Henry  VI.,"  iv.,  3. 

In  the  Bible  it  is  reflexive  twelve  times,  and  four  times 
intransitive. 


348  English  Grammar, 

There  is  an  old  word,  /tight,  now  scarcely  used  in  serious 
speech,  which,  when  signifying  to  be  called  or  named,  has 
all  the  force  of  a  passive  : 

"  This  grizy  beast  (which  Lyon  hight  by  name.)  " 

"  Midsummer  Night's  Dream,"  v,,  140. 
"  Ne  lining  man  like  words  did  neuer  heare. 
As  she  to  me  deliuered  all  that  night ; 
And  at  her  parting  said  shee  Queene  of  Faeries  hight" 

Spenser  :  "  Faerie  Queene,"  i.,  9, 

There  are  verbs  that  have  no  real  subject,  that  express 
actions  performed  by  nobody.  These  are  called  impersonal 
verbs.  For  form's  sake  they  have  generally  an  apparent 
subject,  it,  but  the  it  does  not  denote  anything  in  particular: 

It  had  rained  -aW  night. 

May  it  please  the  Honorable  Court,  we  shall  first  undertake  to 
prove,  etc. 

This  //  is  often  repeated  and  expanded  into  a  long  phrase, 
of  which  the  essential  part  is  that  form  of  the  verb  which  is 
a  verbal  noun.  I  shall  here  enclose  the  phrase  subject  in  a 
parenthesis,  and  italicize  the  verbal  noun  : 

"  O  it  offends  mee  to  the  Soule,  {to  see  a  robustious 
Pery-wig-pated  Fellow  tear  a  Passion  to  tatters  to  verie  ragges). 

Shakesp.  :  "  Hamlet." 

The  impersonal  form  of  expression  was  once  much  more 
common  than  it  is  now.  Verbs  that  can  dispense  with  even 
the  formal  subject  it  are  confined  to  the  archaic  language 
of  poetry : 

"  Theresa's  form — 
Methinks  *  it  glides  before  me  now, 
Between  me  and  yon  chestnut  bough." 

Byron  :  "  Mazeppa." 
"  And  ambling  palfrey  when,  at  need. 
Him  listed  ease  his  battle  steed," 

Scott's  "Marmion,"  canto  i. 

'  Here  me  is  a  survival  of  the  dative  case,  and  thinks  from  A.-S.  thincan,  to 
seem,  not  the  same  word  as  thencan,  to  think.  The  meaning  therefore  is :  It 
seems  to  me. 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  349 

There  is  no  precise  limit  to  the  number  of  verbs  that  may 
occasionally  be  used  impersonally. 

Lastly,  there  are  a  few  verbs  that  in  the  course  of  ages 
have  fallen  so  low  as  to  lose  their  independence  entirely,  and 
become  slaves  of  other  verbs.  They  are  called  auxiliary  or 
helping  verbs.  They  are  can,  let,  may,  must,  shall,  and  will, 
which  are  never  allowed  to  go  without  the  conscious 
presence  of  some  more  substantial  verb.  Be,  dare,  do,  and 
have  are  on  the  downward  road,  and  have  lost  their  inde- 
pendence in  part,  and  there  is  at  present  an  effort  to 
reduce  help  in  the  same  manner.  Thus  we  can,  as  usual,  see 
the  process  in  all  its  stages  from  shall  at  one  end  of  the 
scale  to  help  at  the  other. 

The  division  of  verbs  according  to  their  forms  is  a  much 
more  extensive  subject  than  that  depending  on  their  signifi- 
cations. A  hundred  years  ago  the  good  Lindley  Murray 
could  divide  all  verbs  into  regular,  irregular,  and  defective. 
As  the  defectives,  so  far  as  they  went,  were  necessarily 
either  regular  or  irregular,  there  were  essentially  but  two 
kinds.  The  regulars  added  -d  or  -ed  to  indicate  that  the 
action  was  past ;  the  others  did  not.  The  distinction  was 
not  profound  or  particularly  useful,  but  it  had  the  merit  of 
being  very  easy  to  perceive  and  remember. 

To  make  the  point  clearer,  we  may  revert  to  what  was 
said  (page  345)  of  participles,  that  one  of  them,  expressing 
the  effect  of  an  action  past  and  completed,  very  often  ended 
in  -ed.  There  is  also  an  active  form  of  the  verb,  referring  to 
past  action,  and  called  the  past,  imperfect,  ox  preterit  tense, 
which  also  often  ends  in  -ed. 


plant 

he  plant-ed 

it  was  plant-ed 

plough 

he  plough-ed 

it  was  plough-ed 

urge 

he  urge-d 

it  was  urge-d 

These  are  perfect  specimens  that  have  not  been  worn  down, 
like  had  for  have-d.  The  verb  undergoes  no  change  except 
the  addition,  and  the  past  tense  and  past  participle  are  alike. 
But  there  is  a  class  of  verbs  that  differ  very  essentially  from 
these.     In  the  best  specimens  there  is  an  interior  change  of 


350 


English  Grammar. 


vowel,  nothing  is  added  except  to  the  participle,  and  the 
preterit  and  participle  are  unlike. 


sing 

he  sang 

it  was  sung 

begin 

he  began 

it  was  begun 

fly 

he  flew 

it  had  flow-n 

We  saw  in  the  chapter  on  word-making  that  the  inflec- 
tional system  of  the  Shemitic  nations  was  carried  out  largely 
by  vowel  changes.  This  resource  was  familiar  to  the  Hindoos, 
not  altogether  unknown  to  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  and 
has  been  largely  employed  by  the  Teutonic  nations  from 
times  of  which  there  is  no  memory.  To  indicate  that  an 
action  is  past  and  finished,  one  obvious  way  would  be  to 
repeat  the  verb,  as  if  one  should  say  run-run  he,  meaning 
he  ran,  or  has  run.  But  as  the  most  constant  tendency  of 
language  is  to  shorten  cumbrous  compounds,  this  would 
after  a  time  become  ru-run  he.  It  would  then  be  exactly 
analogous  to  the  Latin  cu-curr-it,  he  or  it  ran.  In  Sanskrit 
the  practice  was,  as  in  the  last  example,  to  diminish  the  first 
half  of  the  compound  by  omitting  the  final  consonant,  and 
substituting  where  possible  a  fainter  vowel,  and  to  double 
or  strengthen  the  vowel  of  the  last  part. 

budh         know 
ni  lead 

tan  stretch 

So  the  Latin  has : 

pedo  pe-ped-it 

pend-o  pe-pend-it 

tend-o  te-tend-it 

tund-o  tu-tud-it 

In  Greek  the  first  part  of  the  doubled  verb  dwindled  to  the 
faintest  form  that  the  initial  consonant  could  assume,  and  a 
faint  e. 


bu-bodh-a 

he  knew 

ni-nay-a 

he  lead 

ta-tan-a 

he  stretched 

morde-o 

mo-mord-it 

curr-o 

cu-curr-it 

sponde-o 

spo-pond-it 

parc-o 

pe-perc-it 

graph-o 
deir-o 


ge-graph-a 
de-dark-a 


thall-o 
phraz-o 


te-thel-a 
pe-phrak-a 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds. 


351 


The  Gothic,  in  repeating,  or  as  it  is  called  reduplicating^ 
the  verb,  preserves  a  greater  part  than  any  of  the  sister 
languages. 


slep-an 

gret-an 

hait-a 

hlaup-an 

skaid-an 


to  sleep 
to  weep 
to  call 
to  run 
to  separate 


sai-zlep  I  slept 

gai-grot  I  wept 

hai-hait  I  called 

hlai-laup  I  ran 

skai-skaid  I  separated 


Yet  although  once  so  common,  there  are  now  only  two 
words  in  the  language  that  show  distinct  traces  of  reduplica- 
tion— did  and  hight,  and  of  these  the  last  is  absolete.  But 
as  the  first  half  of  the  doubled  verb  slowly  disappears,  some 
part  of  the  force  of  its  vowel  is  apt  to  be  transferred  and 
added  to  that  of  the  second  part ;  and  thus  a  vowel  change 
is  effected.  Dr.  Morris  gives  a  list  of  twenty-seven  English 
verbs  whose  past  tenses,  he  thinks,  have  very  evidently  been 
affected  by  reduplication.  He  cites  held,  the  past  tense  of 
hold,  as  a  particular  illustration — Goth,  hai-hald,  O.  H.  Gar. 
hialt  (for  hei-halt)  Mod.  H.  G.  hielt,  A.-S.  heold,  which,  by 
allowing  the  stress  to  fall  upon  the  first  of  the  two  vowels, 
gradually  sank  into  held.  The  Doctor  even  goes  so  far  as  to 
hold  that :  "  All  strong  verbs  in  the  Aryan  languages  origi- 
nally formed  their  perfect  tense  by  reduplication." 

Another  way  to  mark  an  action  as  past  was  to  prefix 
a  particle — originally  a,  perhaps  meaning  then.  This  prefix, 
called  an  augment,  was  especially  common  in  Sanskrit  and 
Greek,  but  unknown  elsewhere  among  Aryan  languages.  A 
third  method  was,  as  shown  above,  to  change  the  root  vowel 
of  the  verb,  and  we  need  not  undertake  to  determine  how  far 
that  was  the  result  of  reduplication.  Lastly  a  particle  might 
be  added  at  the  end  of  the  verb.  The  last  two  are  the 
methods  employed  in  English. 

The  orderly  presentation  of  all  the  forms  that  a  verb  can 
assume  is  usually  called  its  conjugation.  The  word  signifies 
literally  yoking-together ,  that  is  uniting  the  verb  with  the 
various  words  and  particles  that  modify  its  application. 
Those  that  follow  the  same  pattern  are  said  to  be  of  the 


352  English  Grammar. 

same  conjugation.  Hence  it  would  seem  at  first  sight  that 
English  has  just  two  conjugations.  But  these  two  contain 
so  many  varieties  that  the  term  so  applied  would  cover  a 
much  wider  and  less  defined  area  than  it  does  in  Greek 
or  Latin.  On  the  other  hand,  to  apply  that  term  to  each 
variety  would  make  an  indefinite  number — a  dozen  or  twenty 
— conjugations.  For  the  present  I  shall  speak  of  them  as 
two  classes,  premising,  however,  that  none  of  the  names 
thus  far  found  for  these  classes  and  their  subdivisions  have 
proved  entirely  satisfactory.  Grimm  and  the  German  phi- 
lologists called  those  that  change  the  vowel  strong  verbs,  and 
those  that  add  -d  or  -ed,  weak ;  but  the  nature  of  the  weak- 
ness or  strength  is  not  very  apparent.  It  often  happens  that 
when  a  word  loses  a  letter  or  syllable  in  one  part,  a  vowel  or 
consonant  is  inserted  in  another.  The  syllable  thus  increased 
is  said  to  be  strengthened,  and  the  forms  that  contain  such 
syllables  are  called  strong  forms,  while  others,  unchanged, 
or  reduced  in  volume,  are  known  as  weak  forms.  Let  there 
be  a  word  find — the  i  as  in  fin — and  let  this  word,  through 
some  unknown  witchcraft,  be  changed  into  found,  it  would 
take  but  a  moderate  stretch  of  fancy  to  call  the  former 
a  weak  and  the  latter  a  strong  form.  Or,  let  lip  be  a  root  or 
simplest  possible  form  of  a  word  signifying  to  anoint,  limp, 
leip,  leiph,  loiph,  might  be  called  strengthened  forrris  of  the 
same.  In  this  sense  the  terms  strong  and  weak  are  quite 
common  in  philology,  yet  I  suspect  that  verbs  were  first 
classified  as  strong  and  weak  for  reasons  still  more  recondite 
and  fanciful.  The  same  two  classes  of  verbs  have  been  called 
by  some  the  old  and  the  new  conjugations,  but  as  both 
are  equally  found  in  the  oldest  literary  monument  of  the 
Teutonic  nations — the  Gospels  of  Ulfilas — it  does  not  ap- 
pear at  first  sight  how  the  one  can  be  proved  to  be  older 
than  the  other.  The  truth  is  both  these  distinctions  have 
to  seek  their  justification  by  going  far  beyond  the  bounds  of 
the  English  tongue.  As  nothing  analogous  to  the  addition 
of  -ed  is  found  in  any  but  one  branch  of  the  Aryan  family,  it 
is  assumed  to  have  arisen  among  our  Gothic  or  Teutonic 
ancestors  after  their  separation  from  the  other  branches,  and 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds,  353 

therefore  later  than  forms  that  are  common  to  all.  In  the 
present  English  the  past  tense  is  not  always  stronger  than 
the  present  in  the  sense  above  explained  : 

bite        bit  shoot        shot 

slide       slid  fall  fell 

This,  however,  is  due  to  successive  changes. 

As  regards  the  past  or  passive  participle  the  common  ter- 
mination in  Sanskrit  was  -ana,  in  Goth.,  O.  H.  Ger.,  and  Old 
Saxon,  -an,  to  which  terminations  for  number,  gender,  and 
case  might  be  added.  The  Norse  changed  this  to  -in,  the 
other  Teutonic  tongues  to  -en,  in  which  form  it  still  survives 
in  English  in  spok-en,  wov-en,  driv-en,  and  a  few  others.  From 
some  words  e  has  been  pressed  out — blown,  drawn,  flown, 
hewn,  born — from  others  the  entire  en  has  been  dropped — 
burst,  flung,  fought,  spun.  Past  participles  of  both  classes 
often  had  the  particle  go-  prefixed  in  Gothic  and  Old  High 
German,  ge-  in  A.-S.  and  Modern  H.  G.,  in  which  last  it 
is  still  very  common  : 

ge-geben        given  ge-schrieben        written 

This  particle  was  prefixed  to  both  nouns  and  verbs.  In 
many  instances  it  had  no  perceptible  significance ;  in  others 
it  seemed  to  add  the  idea  of  completeness  or  collectiveness. 
Grimm  conjectured  that  it  was  allied  to  the  Latin  cum  or 
con.  In  A.-S.  it  came  to  be  pronounced  ^^-  and  then,  through 
the  gradations  y-  and  /-,  passed  from  the  living  speech  of 
men,  leaving  only  a  single  vestige  in  e-nough,  Ger.  ge-nug. 
Although  never  used  now  but  in  burlesque  or  drollery,  it 
was  once  quite  common  : 

"  The  wrathful  winter  preaching  on  a-pace. 
With  blustering  blastes  had  aXybared  the  treen." 

"  Mirror  for  Magistrates,"  a.d.  1563. 

"  But  come  thou  goddess  fair  and  free. 

In  htzy^n  ycieped  Euphrocyne." 

Milton. 
•3 


354  English  Grammar. 

More  expressive  terms  might  have  been  found  for  the 
two  great  divisions  of  verbs.  Botanists  employ  two  words 
that  would  very  nearly  express  the  distinction.  They  are 
endogenous,  growing  internally,  and  exogenous,  growing  ex- 
ternally. I  would  suggest  endotropic  and  epithetic  as  express- 
ing exactly  the  ideas  of  internal  change  and  external 
addition.  They  may  be  thought  rather  lengthy,  and  for 
the  rest  I  shall  use  the  words  strong  and  weak,  not  because 
they  are  appropriate  but  because  they  are  short  and  pretty 
generally  known. 

The  strong  verbs  are  among  the  most  original,  characteris- 
tic, and  expressive  words  in  the  language.  All  but  one  or 
two  are  indigenous.  Rive  is  Scandinavian,  but  had  gained  a 
residence  before  the  thirteenth  century  ;  plead  z-axao.  from  the 
Norman-French  but  a  little  later,  and  many  do  not  consider 
it  a  strong  verb.  All  the  others  are  natives  ;  all  are  primary 
— that  is,  not  derived  from  any  other  known  words ;  and  all 
are  monosyllables,  or  the  verbal  part  is  such,  with  an  added 
prefix,  like  a-,  be-,  for-,  fore-,  over-,  under-,  or  with-.  Their 
most  constant  characteristic  is  that  the  vowel  sound  in  the 
past  tense  differs  from  that  of  the  present,  and  they  never  add 
-d  or  its  substitue  -t  to  either  the  past  tense  or  participle. 
Their  number  has  been  decreasing  for  a  thousand  years. 
These  relics  of  hoary  eld  succumb  one  by  one  to  the  rule  of 
an  encroaching  majority,  relinquish  the  change  of  vowel  and 
accept  an  added  -ed,  as  the  Chinese  did  the  pig-tail.  It  will 
be  seen  by  the  lists  given  below  that,  out  of  1 18,  forms  in  -ed 
are  encroaching  upon  29,  and  that  69  have  gone  over  bodily 
to  the  other  class.  In  a  very  correct  sense  these  so-called 
strong  verbs  are  of  all  words  the  weakest.  Secondary  verbs, 
those  derived  from  other  verbs  or  from  nouns,  and  all  verbs 
acquired  from  external  sources,  take  -ed — that  is,  belong  to 
the  weak  class,  except  a  few  that  have  passed  from  the  weak 
to  the  strong  class  in  relatively  modern  times. 

Even  if  it  were  possible  it  would  require  too  much  space 
to  show  the  causes  that  produced  all  the  varying  forms  of 
these  verbs,  but  I  may  indicate  one  or  two  lines  of  transfor- 
mation ;  and  doubtless  there  was  an  intelligible  cause  for 


Verds  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  355 

nearly  every  change.  The  past  participle  is  seen  to  differ 
very  often,  but  not  always,  from  the  past  tense.  Now  we 
may  go  back  to  the  Anglo-Saxon,  and  take  sing-an,  to  sing, 
as  a  sample  of  a  considerable  class.  The  first  person  singu- 
lar and  all  the  plural  of  the  present  indicative,  the  whole 
present  subjunctive,  the  imperative,  infinitive,  and  present 
participle  have  the  same  vowel,  i.  In  the  past  tense  the 
first  and  third  persons  singular  were  sang,  the  second  person 
singular  sung-e,  and  all  the  plural  sung-on.  The  past  parti- 
ciple was  sung-en,  following  the  plural  and  not  the  singular 
of  the  past  tense.  Of  184  verbs  found  in  the  remains  of 
Saxon  literature  with  sufficient  fulness  of  their  several  parts, 
the  vowel  of  the  first  person  singular  past  is  like  that  of  the 
present  in  only  one  instance,  and  that  a  doubtful  variant.  In 
a  similar  doubtful  instance  the  participle  follows  the  singular 
past.  In  all  other  cases  the  past  tense  is  peculiar.  In  47 
the  participle  follows  the  present  tense  ;  in  27  others  there  is 
only  a  difference  in  the  length  of  the  vowel.  In  52  the  par- 
ticiple follows  the  plural  of  the  past  tense,  and  in  57  others 
it  deviates  only  by  having  o  instead  of  u.  The  participle 
had  o  or  u  in  99  words — more  than  half, — and  always  had  the 
termination  -en.  Long  i  in  the  present  takes  long  a  in  the 
past  with  only  one  exception,  and  of  58  words  having  z  in 
the  present  50  have  a  in  the  past.  It  will  be  seen  by  the  list 
presented  below  how  persistently  this  a  held  its  place  against 
the  pressure  of  o  and  u.  Like  most  old  usages,  it  held  its 
ground  best  in  Scotland,  of  which  an  old  comic  song,  "  The 
Auld  Wife  wi'  the  Wee  Pickle  Tow,"  affords  an  excellent 
example : 

"  She  saf  an'  she  grai  an'  she  j^af  an*  she  flang. 
She  chochert,  she  bycchert,  she  wrigglet,  she  wrang." 

While  the  u  of  the  past  plural  is  thus  supplanting  the  a  of 
the  singular,  some  hold  that  we  ought  to  say :  he  sang,  and 
they  sung;  but  such  a  distinction  is  not  generally  observed 
now  nor  sustained  by  the  usage  of  the  past  two  centuries. 
The  Bible  uses  the  two  forms  interchangeably,  having  sang 


356 


English  Grammar. 


nine  times  as  a  plural  and  sung  three  times.  Chaucer  writes 
song  (modern  sung)  indifferently  as  singular  or  plural.  So 
Dryden  : 

"  War,  he  sung,  is  toil  and  trouble, 
Honour  but  an  empty  bubble." 

"  Alexander's  Feast." 

The  following  list  contains  nearly  all  that  can  now  be 
reckoned  as  strong  verbs,  including  some  that  hold  their 
places  by  a  very  insecure  tenure.  The  word  has  been  ad- 
mitted when  either  the  past  tense  or  past  participle  is  strong 
in  usage — that  is,  at  all  recent.  When  a  verb  is  found  both 
single  and  with  a  prefix,  as  hold  and  behold,  only  one  is 
given.  Forms  in  italics  are  obsolete  ;  those  in  small  capitals 
are  Saxon,  given  to  show  that  the  word  once  had  family 
connections : 


PRESENT 

1  abide 

2  awake 

3  bake 

4  be 

5  bear 

6  beat 

7  begin 

8  bid 

9  bind 


PAST 

PARTICIPLE 

abode 

abidden,  abode' 

awoke,  awaked 

awaked 

book,  baked 

baken,     baked* 

been 

bare,  bore 

born,       borne ' 

bet,  beat 

beaten  * 

began 

begun 

bade,  bid 

bidden,    bid 

band,  bound 

bounden,  bound 

'   "  Eumenes  could  not  have  abidden." 

Raleigh's  "Hist,  of  the  World." 

*  "  Behold  a  cake  was  baken  on  the  coals." 

I  Kings  xix.,  6. 
"  A  firlot  of  good  cakes  my  Elspa  beuk. 
And  a  good  ham  is  hingin  in  the  nook." 

Allan  Ramsay's  "  Gentle  Shepherd,"  ii.,  4. 

*  "And  Solomon  thad  threescore  and  ten  thousand  that  bai-e  burdens." 

I  Kings  v.,  15. 
*  "  Persand  the  sabill  barmkyn  noctumall, 
Bet  down  the  skyes  clowdy  mantill  wall. " 

Gawin  Douglas,  a.d.  1513. 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds. 


357 


PRESENT 

10  bite 

11  bleed 

12  blow 

13  break 

14  breed 

15  chide 

16  choose 

17  cleave  (adhere) 

18  cleave  (split) 

19  climb 

20  cling 

21  come 

22  crow 

23  CWETHAN 


PAST  PARTICIPLE 

bitten,      bit  * 
bled* 
blown 
broken  * 
bred 
chidden,  chid  * 
chosen 
cleaved  * 
cloven,  cleaved,  cleft* 
clamb,  clomb,  climbed  clomben,  climbed  ^ 
dang,  clung  clung 

came  comen,  come  ' 

crew  crowed 

quoth  GE-CWETHEN 


bate,  bote,  bit 
bled 
blew 
brake,  broke 

bred 
chode,  chid 
chose 
cleaved,  clave 
clave,  clove,  cleft 


'  "  His  Bodi  was  Boiled,  for  wraththe  he  bot  his  lippes." 

"  Piers  the  Plowman,"  1362. 
"  Yet  there  the  steel  stayd  not,  but  inly  bate" 

Spenser's  "  Faerie  Queene,"  ii.,  5-7. 
'  Bleed,  breed,  feed,  lead,  meet,  plead,  and  read  are  not  generally  reckoned 
among  strong  verbs  because  they  were  not  so  anciently  ;  but  now  they  have  the 
two  essentials  that  they  change  the  vowel  and  add  nothing. 

'  ' '  And  all  the  people  of  the  land  went  into  the  house  of  Baal,  and  brake  it 
down." — 2  Kings  xi.,  18. 

*  "  Jacob  was  wroth  and  chode  with  Laban." 

*  "  he  smote  4ill  his  hand  clave  to  the  sword.  " 

2  Sam.  xxiii,,  10. 
"  their  tongue  cleaved  to  the  roof  of  their  mouth." 

Job  xxix,,  10. 
"  if  any  blot  hath  cleaved  to  mine  hands." — ^JoB.  xxxi.,  7. 

•  "  Abraham   *     *    *   clave  the  wood  for  the  burnt  offering." 

Gen.  xxii.,  3. 

'  ' '  For  hit  clam  vche  a  clyfle  cubites  fyftene, 
Ouer  the  hy3est  hylle." 

"Alliterative  Poems,"  A.D.  1360. 
*'  We  forded  the  river  and  clomb  the  high  hill  ; 
Never  our  steeds  for  a  day  stood  still." 

Byron's  "  Siege  of  Corinth." 

*  "  The  day  is  comen  of  her  departyng." 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 


358 


English  Grammar, 


PRESENT 

24  dig 

25  do 

26  draw 

27  drink 

28  drive 

29  eat 

30  fall 

31  feed 

32  fight 

33  find 

34  fling 

35  fly 

36  forsake 

37  freeze 

38  get 

39  give 

40  gnaw 


PAST 

PARTICIPLE 

digged,  dug 

digged, 

dug' 

did 

done 

drew 

drawn 

drank 

drunken, 

, drunk 

drave^  drove 

driven ' 

ate 

eaten 

fell 

fallen 

fed 

fed 

fought 

foughten, 

, fought  * 

fand,  found 

founden, 

,  found  * 

flang,  flung 

flung' 

flew 

flown 

forsook 

forsaken 

froze 

frozen 

gat,  got 

gotten, 

,  got' 

gave 

given 

gnew,  gnawed 

gnawn. 

,  gnawed ' 

'  Dug  is  modern.  Digged  occurs  thirty-seven  times  in  the  Bible,  but  dug 
never. 

*  "  And  he  drave  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountain." — Judges  i.,  ig. 

*  "  on  the  foughten  field 
Michael  and  his  angels  prevalent 
Encamping. " 

"  Paradise  Lost,"  vi.,  410. 

*  "  And  he  shal  han  Custance  in  mariage. 
And  certein  gold,  I  not  what  (juantitie, 
And  Yitrto  founden  sufhsant  seurtie." 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 
"  Donald  Caird  finds  orra  things 
Whar  Allan  Gregor /aw^  the  tangs." 

Scotch  Song. 
*  "  To  tell  how  Maggie  lap  and  Jiang, 
A  supple  jade  she  was  and  Strang." 

"  Tarn  o'  Shanter." 

•  "  And  David  gat  him  a  name  when  he  returned  from  smiting  the  Syrians  in 
the  valley  of  salt." — 2  Sam.  viii.,  13. 

''  "  he  laye  downe  to  slepe,  for  to  put  ye  commaundement,  which  so  gnew  and 
freated  his  conscience,  out  of  mind." — Tyndale  :  "  Prologue  to  the  Book  of 
Jonah." 

"stark  spoyl'd  with  the  Staggers,  begnawne  with  the  Bots." — Shakesp.  : 
"  Taming  of  the  Shrew,"  iii.,  2. 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds. 


359 


PRESENT 

41  go 

42  grafen 

43  grind 

44  grow 

45  king,  hang 

46  heave 

47  help 


PAST 

gaed,  yode 
grof,  graved 
ground 
grew 
Jiangs  hung,  hanged 
hovCy  heaved 
holp,  helped 


PARTICIPLE 

gone ' 
graven,  graved  * 

ground 

grown 
hung,  hanged ' 

heaved  * 
holpen,  helped  * 


'  "  Then  \  gaed  hzxix^  a  crowdie-time 
And  soon  I  made  me  ready." 

Burns. 
"  Thair  scrippes,  quer  thai  rade  ox  yode 
Tham  failed  neuer  o  drince  ne  fode." 

"  Cursor  Mundi,"  1320. 
*  "  Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee  axiy  graven  image." 

^  ' '  Nae  mair  by  Babel's  streams  we  '11  weep 
To  think  upon  our  Zion, 
And  king  our  fiddles  up  to  sleep. 
Like  baby-clouts  a-drying." 

Burns:  "Ordination." 

There  are  here  two  verbs,  an  original  and  a  derivative.  The  original  had  in 
A.-S.  a  shortened  form,  hdn,  to  hang,  ic  h6,  ihu  h/hsi,  he  hdhth,  I  hang,  etc. 
The  past  tense  was  hhig,  participle  hange7i,  from  which  the  lineal  descendant  is 
our  hung.  It  was  intransitive,  so  that  we  should  consistently  say  :  '*  His  hair 
hangs  loose  "  ;  "  The  fruit  hung  thick  on  the  trees  "  ;  "  The  sword  had  hung 
there  for  years."  At  an  early  age,  it  is  said  in  the  year  1137,  and  in  the  North 
of  England,  a  transitive  verb  was  developed,  like  set  from  sit,  and  raise  from 
rise,  which  took  the  form  hang,  hanged,  hanged.  The  Bible  adheres  to  these 
later  forms,  even  where  we  should  not  do  so  now.  It  has  only  hanged,  and 
never  hung ;  but  the  sense  is  always  transitive.  "  We  hanged  our  harps  upon 
the  willows." — Psa.  137. 

"If  he  be  not  borne  to  bee  hanged  our  case  is  miserable." — Shakesp.  : 
"  Tempest,"  i.,  i. 

In  modern  times  we  have  got  the  two  verbs  intermixed.     We  would  not  say  : 
"  He  hanged\i\%  hat  on  a  peg,"  but  "  He  hung."     We  reserve  hanged iox  death 
by  hanging.     "  He  was  hung"  would  be  incorrect  on  any  ground. 
*  ' '  the  icy  island  hove  in  sight 
Like  a  city  lost  at  sea. " 

H.  MiLNOR  Clapp. 

*  "  Sir  Robert  never  holpe  to  make  this  legge." 

Shakesp.  :  "  King  John,"  i.,  i. 

'■  He  hath  holpen  his  servant  Israel  in  remembrance  of  his  mercy." — LuKE 
i.,  45. 


36o 


English  Grammar. 


PRESENT 

48  hew 

49  hide 

50  hold 

51  know 

52  lade 

53  lead 

54  lie 

55  meet 

56  melt 

57  mow 

58  plead 

59  read 

60  ride 

6 1  ring 

62  rinney  rin,  run 

63  rise 

64  rive 

65  rot 

66  see 

67  seeth 

68  shake 


PAST 

hewed 
hid 
held 
knew 
lod,  laded 
lod,  led 
lay 
met 
malty  melted 
mew,  mowed 
pleaded,  pled 
read 
radCj  rode 
rang 
ran 
rase,  rose 
rove,  rived 
rotted 
saw 
sod,  seethed 
shook 


PARTICIPLE 

hewn, 

hewed 

hidden 

holden,  held  * 

known 

loden^ 

,  laden ' 

led' 

lien, 

,  lain 

met 

molten. 

melted  * 

mown, 

mowed ' 

pleaded,  pled 

read 

ridden  * 

rungen. 

rung 

ronnen, 

run* 

risen  * 

riven  * 

rotted, 

rotten 

seen 

sodden. 

seethen ' 

shaken 

*  "  I  have  long  holden  my  peace." 

IsA.  xlii.,  14. 
*  "  Loaden  "  was  sanctioned  by  the  writers  of  the  Spectator. 

'  '•  bi  biholding  upon  ymagis  or  upon  such  peinting,  his  witt  schal  be  dressid 
&  &</ forth  evener  &  more  sabili." — Reginald  Pecock. 

^  "  And  the  metalle  be  the  hete  of  the  fire  malt." 

Capgrave. 

*  "  Mew  " — a  Yorkshire  word.  '  See  41. 

'  "som  fresh  othe,  that  is  not  stale,  but  will  rin  round  in  the  mouth." 

Roger  Ascham. 
*  ' '  And  Southron  rase  and  coost  their  claes, 
Behind  him  in  a  raw,  man." 

Burns. 

•  "  And  with  his  sword  she  rove  her  to  the  heart." 

Chaucer  :   "  Legend  of  Dido." 

'•  "Jacob  j<?</ pottage,  and  Esau  came  from  the  field  and  he  was  faint." — 
Gen.  XXV.,  29. 


Verbs  and  TJieir  Several  Kinds. 


361 


PRESENT 

PAST 

PARTICIPLE 

69  shape 

shope^  shaped 

shapen, 

shaped ' 

70  shave 

shaved 

shaven. 

shaved 

71  shear 

shaVy  shore,  sheared 

shorn. 

sheared ' 

72  shine 

shone,   shined 

shone, 

shined 

73  shoot 

shot 

shotten, 

shot' 

74  show 

showed 

shown 

75  shrink 

shrank,  shrunk 

shrunken) 

,  shrunk 

76  shrive 

shrove,  shrived 

shriven 

77  sing 

sang,  sung 

sung 

78  sink 

sank 

sunken, 

sunk 

79  sit 

sate,  sat 

sitten, 

sat* 

80  slay 

slew 

slain 

81  slide 

slod,  slid 

slidden. 

slid' 

82  sling 

slang,  slung 

slung  • 

83  slink 

slank,  slunk 

slunk. 

84  smite 

smat,  smote 

smitten* 

85  sow 

setv,  sowed 

sown* 

'  "  God,  that  shope  both  se  and  sand, 
Saue  Edward  King  of  Ingland." 

Lawrence  Minot  :  "  Political  Songs  of  1352." 

*  ' '  And  with  no  craft  of  combes  brode 

They  might  his  hore  lockes  shode. 
And  she  ne  wolde  not  be  shore." 

GowER :  "  Confessio." 
The  original  past  tense  was  lost  before  the  year  1300. 

*  "  And  shotten  ageyns  him  with  shot," 

"  Piers  Plowman." 

*  ' '  Beneath  its  shade,  the  place  of  state. 

On  oaken  settle  Marmion  saie." 

Scott. 

' '  After  these  grants  the  parliament  was  dissolved,  which  had  sti^n  near  two 
years  and  a  half." — Hume  :  "  History  of  England,"  chap.  xxii. 

*  "  In  hys  goynge  out  of  hys  schyp  a  slod  wyth  hys  o  voot  &  styckede  in  the 
sond." — John  of  Trevisa,  1387. 

'  "  And  David  put  his  hand  in  his  bag,  and  took  thence  a  stone  and  slang^ 
it." — I  Sam.  xvii.,  49. 

'  "  The  sarazins  he  smatte. 
That  his  blod  hatte." 

"  Ballad  of  King  Horn." 

*  "  The  pt.  t.  now  in  use  is  sowed,  but  the  correct  form  is  sew  ;  the  like  is 
true  for  the  verb  to  mow" — Skeat's  *'  Etymological  Dictionary." 


362 


English  Grammar. 


PRESENT  PAST 

86  speak  spake,  spoke 

87  speed  speeded,  sped 

88  spin  span,  spun 

89  spring  sprang,  sprung 

90  stand  stood 

91  steal  stal,  stole 

92  stick  sticked,  stack,  stuck 

93  sting  stang,  stung 

94  stink  stank,  stunk 

95  strew  strewed 

96  stride  strode 

97  strike  strack,  strake,  struck    stroken,  stricken,  struck' 

98  string  Strang,  strung  strung 

99  strive  strove  striven 


PARTICIPLE 

spoken 
speeded,  sped  * 
spun" 
sprung 
stonden,  standen,  stood 
stolen ' 
sticked,  stuck  * 
stongen,  stung ' 
stunk 
strewn 
stridden 


'  Originally  a  weak  verb  and  derived  from  the  noun  speed. 
'  "  She,  them  saluting  there,  by  them  sate  still, 
Beholding  how  the  thrids  of  life  they  span." 

Spenser  :  "  Faerie  Queene,"  iv.,  2. 
'  "  Bot  stall  abak  3ond  in  hys  regioun  far 
Behind  the  circulat  warld  of  Jupiter." 

Gawin  Douglas. 

*  "  Then  he  stac  up  the  stange3  sloped  the  welle3." 

"  Alliterative  Poems,"  1360. 
"  The  sowdan  and  the  cristen  everichone 
Ben  al  taken  and  stiked  zX.  the  bord." 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 
Two  verbs  became  confused  at  an  early  age  ;  an  early  English  steken,  stak, 
stoken,  to  pierce,  and  a  weak  A.-S.  slician,  siicode,  to  adhere.     See  under  81. 

'  "  And  therwithal  he  blent  and  cried  A  ! 

As  though  he  stongen  were  unto  the  herte." 

Chaucer  :  "  The  Knightes  Tale." 

•  "  Then  Jocky  strack  and  Jenny  strack 
Till  the  sweat  did  blind  their  een." 

"  Scottish  Song  of  Harvest." 
"  And  fearing  lest  they  should  fall  into  the  quicksands,  strake  sail,  and  so 
were  driven." — Acts  xxvii.,  17. 

"  How  like  a  Deere,  stroken  by  many  princes. 
Dost  thou  heere  lye  ?  " 

Shakesp  :  "  Julius  Caesar,"  Act  iii. 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds. 


363 


PRESENT 

100  swell 

10 1  swear 

102  swim 

103  swing 

104  take 

105  tear 

106  thrive 

107  throw 

108  tread 

109  wash 
no  wax 
jii  wear 

112  weave 

113  WESAN 

114  win 


PAST 

swal,  swelled 
sware,  swore 
swam 
swung y  swung 
took 
tare,  tore 
throve 
threw 
trod 
wesh,  wushy  washed 
wex,  wox,  waxed 
warey  wore 
wove 
was 
wan,  won 


PARTICIPLE 

swollen,  swelled* 
sworn " 
swum 
swung 
taken 
torn ' 
thriven 
thrown 
trodden 

washen,  washed* 
waxen,  waxed  * 
worn* 
woven 
Ger.  ge-wesen 

wonnen,  won  ^ 


'  "  And  aither  a  3  en  other  swal 
And  let  that  vule  mod  ut  al. " 
(And  each  against  the  other  swelled, 
And  let  out  all  its  evil  temper.) 

"  Owl  and  Nightingale,"  1250. 
-    '  And  they  rose  up  betimes  in  the  morning  and  sware  one  to  another. — 
Gen.  xxvi.,  31. 

*  "  And  there  came  forth  two  she  bears  out  of  the  wood  and  tare  forty  and 
two  children  of  them." — 2  Kings  ii.,  24. 

■*  "  the  blod    that   bohte,   the  water  that  te  world  wesh   of   sake    and   of 
sunne." — "  The  Wooing  of  Our  Lord,"  1210. 

iVush  is  Scotch,  sometimes  pronounced  weesh. 

*  "  Hunger  wex  in  land  chanaan. 

"  Genesis  and  Exodus,"  1250. 
*  "  Anon  ther  sprong  vp  flour  and  gras, 

Where  as  the  drope  falle  was 
And  wox  anonal  medwe-grene." 

GowKR  :    "  Confessio." 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  when  the  children  of  Israel  were  waxen  strong,  that 
they  put  the  Canaanites  to  tribute." — Joshua  xvii.,  13. 

*  "  There  met  him  out  of  the  city  a  man  which  had  devils  long  time,  and 
ware  no  clothes." — Luke  viii.,  27. 

'  "  So  that  the  king  in   such    manere    suluer    wan    ynou." — Robert    of 
Gloucester,  1298. 


364  English  Grammar, 

PRESENT  PAST  PARTICIPLE 

115  wind  wand,  wond,  wound  wonden,  wound 

116  wring  wrung,  wrung  wrung* 

117  wit  or  wot  wist  wist 

118  write  wrat,  wrote  written* 

When  there  -is  a  surviving  participle  in  -en  and  a  more 
modern  one,  the  former  is  apt  to  sink  into  a  mere  adjective, 
and  the  verbal  character  is  left  to  the  latter.  Such  retired 
participles  are  bounden,  cloven,  drunken,  hewn,  molten,  mown, 
rotten,  sodden,  shapen,  shaven,  shrunken,  stricken,  sunken, 
swollen,  washen. 

I  have  omitted  the  Scotch  formula — "  not  proven,"  which 
seems  to  be  gaining  favor  now  along  with  other  absurdities. 
Prove  is  a  Latin  word,  and  has  no  claim  to  a  participle  in 
-en.  I  do  not  know  what  the  corresponding  past  tense 
would  be. 

It  has  been  already  remarked  that  the  strong  verbs  are  a 
small  and  diminishing  class.  There  are  few  accessions. 
Dr.  Latham  goes  so  far  as  to  say : 

"  Many  strong  verbs  become  weak,  whilst  no  weak  verb  ever 
becomes  strong." — "  English  Language,"  p.  333. 

This  assertion  is  too  absolute.  In  the  present  state  of  the 
language  I  think  the  following,  once  weak,  have  the  essen- 
tial features  of  strong  verbs  : 


bleed 

feed 

read 

speed 

breed 

hide 

rot 

stick 

cleave  (adhere) 

lead 

show 

string 

dig 

plead 

sow 

strive 

'  "  They  called  the  porter  to  counsell, 
And  wrang  his  necke  in  two, 
And  caste  hym  in  a  depe  dungeon, 
And  toke  hys  keys  hym  fro." 

"Adam  Bell,  Clym  of  the  Clough,"  etc. 
And,  her  before,  the  vile  Enchanter  sate. 
Figuring  straunge  characters  of  his  art  : 
With  living  blood  he  those  characters  wraie" 

Spenser  :  "  Faerie  Queene,"  iii.,  12. 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds. 


365 


It  is  irrelevant  to  say  that  a  few  centuries  ago  these  were 
all  weak  verbs  and  therefore  are  so  still.  The  question  is 
not  what  they  were,  but  what  they  are.  At  the  same  time, 
language  used  by  a  whole  people  never  is  or  was  self-con- 
sistant,  and  scattered  examples  are  to  be  found  of  strong 
verbs  used  as  weak,  and  weak  as  strong,  notwithstanding 
the  prevailing  usage.  There  are  persons,  not  without  edu- 
cation, especially  in  the  southern  part  of  the  United  States, 
who  habitually  say  :  "  I  seen  it,"  and  "  I  done  so."  Contrari- 
wise it  has  been  but  too  common  to  use  the  past  tense,  like 
fell,  hid,  drove,  shook,  took,  stole,  wrote,  instead  of  the  appro- 
priate participles.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  that  in  Shakes- 
peare, but  much  more  in  the  age  of  Queen  Anne.  The 
Spectator  abounds  with  such  truncated  forms  as  rid  and  writ 
doing  double  duty  as  rode,  wrote,  ridden  and  written. 

The  principal  strong  verbs  that  have  become  weak  are 
the  following : 


ache 

float 

quail 

sup 

bequeath 

flow 

reek 

sweat 

bereave 

fold 

row 

sweep 

betide 

fret 

rue 

tease 

bow 

glide 

scathe 

thrash 

braid 

glow 

shed 

throng 

brew 

gripe 

shove 

tow 

brook 

knead 

sigh 

wade 

burn 

laugh 

sleep 

walk 

burst 

leap 

slit 

weep 

carve 

let 

smoke 

weigh 

cast 

He 

span 

well 

chew 

lock 

spew 

wheeze 

creep 

lose 

sprout 

wink 

dare 

low 

spurn 

wreak 

delve 

mete 

starve 

writhe 

dive 

mourn 

step 

yell 

dread 

owe 

suck 

yield 

fare 

With  all   their  irregularities  the  strong  verbs  have  two 
points  that  are  constant.      They  form  the  past  tense  by 


o 


66  English  Grammar. 


internal  change,  and  they  never  add  -d  or  -t  to  it.  On  the 
other  hand  the  so-called  weak  have  two  equally  constant 
features.  The  past  tense  and  past  participle  are  always 
alike,  and  always  end  in  -d  or  its  weaker  representative  -/. 
These  characteristics  are  not  quite  the  opposites  of  each 
other,  yet  the  difference  between  the  best  preser^'f^ 
examples  of  each  is  very  apparent : 

sing  sang  sung 

employ  employ-ed  employ-ed 

The  one  changes  the  vowel  and  adds  nothing ;  the  other 
adds  ~ed  and  changes  nothing.  In  the  one  the  past  tense 
and  participle  differ ;  in  the  other  they  are  identical. 

What  then  is  this  -ed  that  is  added  to  the  weak  verbs  ? 
To  avoid  prolixity,  let  it  suffice  to  say  that  it  is  now  held  to 
be  the  past  auxiliary  verb  did,  so  that  /  employ-ed  is  as  good 
as  to  say  I  employ  did,  or  /  did  employ.  Apd,  as  every  one 
knows,  we  say  so  now  when  very  positive,  and  always  use 
do  or  did  when  we  deny,  forbid,  or  ask  a  question.  But 
this  did  has  been  so  worn  down  in  all  modern  Teutonic 
languages  that  it  would  probably  never  have  been  recognized 
but  that  happily  it  has  been  better  preserved  in  the  Gothic. 
Even  there  it  is  only  in  the  dual  and  plural  that  it  remains 
tolerably  unbroken.  The  singular  and  plural  of  the  Gothir 
haban,  to  have,  were : 

SINGULAR,  PAST  PLURAL,  PAST 

I  St  Person  habai-da  habai-ded-um 

2d  Person  habai-de-s  habai-ded-uths 

3d  Person  habai-da  habai-ded-un 

The  last  d  is  lost  from  the  singular.  The  further  ter- 
minations are  personal  endings.  And  as  this  did  is  itself  a 
reduplication  of  do,  if  Dr.  Morris  is  correct  in  supposing 
that  the  same  thing  has  taken  place  in  the  history  of  all 
strong  verbs,  it  follows  that  every  simple  past  tense  is  a 
more  or  less  remote  result  of  reduplication.  What  is  here 
said,  however,  applies  only  to  the  past  tense,  and  not  at  all 
to  the  participle.  If  they  are  alike  now  it  is  because  the 
verb  has  been  worn  down  to  the  form  of  the  participle. 


Verds  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  367 

The  termination  of  the  participle  is  a  suffix  that  in  Sanskrit 
assumed  the  form  -ta,  in  Greek '  and  Latin  the  corresponding 
form  -to,  in  Gothic  -da,  in  Anglo-Saxon  -od,  -ad,  -ed,  -d,  -t. 
To  these  were  added  other  suffixes  distinguishing  number, 
gender,  and  case,  according  to  the  inflectional  system  of  each 
language. 

The  termination  -edhas  suffered  so  much  wear  and  under- 
gone such  a  variety  of  modifications  that  it  is  not  always 
easily  recognized.  This  process  of  attrition  was  in  full 
activity  long  before  the  Norman  Conquest,  and  Anglo-Saxon 
Grammars  give  numerous  rules  under  which  the  usual  ter- 
minations -ode,  -ede  become  -de,  and  -te  or  -d  and  -/,  and  let- 
ters are  altered  or  suppressed  in  the  radical  portions  of 
verbs,  rules  which  all  depend  upon  the  more  general  natural 
principle  of  avoiding  difficult  combinations  of  sounds.  But 
instead  of  discussing  ancient  abbreviations,  let  us  consider 
those  of  the  present. 

Although  -ed  may  be  regarded  as  the  termination  of  the 
past  tense  and  past  participle,  it  is  never  found  in  full  force 
except  when  appended  to  verbs  that  end  in  -d  or  -t,  and  not 
after  all  of  them.  In  most  cases  writing  and  pronunciation 
are  at  variance. 


We 

write 

exalt-ed 

We  read 

exalt-ed 

surround-ed 

« 

surround-ed 

support-ed 

« 

support-ed 

absorb-ed 

u 

absorbd 

begg-ed 

« 

begd 

fiU-ed 

11 

fild 

disarm-ed 

u 

disarmd 

display-ed 

(( 

displaid 

When  the  verb  ends  with  a  light  or  surd  mute  consonant, 
-ed  is  pronounced  as  /. 

puff-ed  puft  hiss-ed  hist 

look-ed  lookt  quench-ed  quensht 

stopp-ed  stopt  preach-ed  preacht 

To  verbs  ending  in  ^  a  second  e  is  not  added. 

'  Found  in  what  are  now  reckoned  as  verbal  adjectives  aid^tfToi,  ^Xeitroif 
yvooro?,  deHTo?,  etc. 


368 


English  Grammar. 


The  less  obvious  modifications  will  be  best  understood 
after  exhibiting  a  list  of  the  verbs  in  which  they  are  found. 
The  very  peculiar  and  important  group  of  auxihary  verbs 
will  be  reserved  for  particular  consideration  in  the  next 
chapter.  Where  two  forms  are  given  in  the  following  list 
the  one  in  most  common  use  is  placed  first. 


bend 

bent 

lay 

laid 

bereave 

bereaved,  bereft 

lean 

leaned,  leant 

beseech 

besought 

leap 

leaped,  leapt 

beset 

beset 

learn 

learned,  learnt 

bet 

bet 

leave 

left 

blend 

blended,  blent 

lend 

lent 

bless 

blessed,  blest 

let 

let 

bring 

brought 

light 

lighted,  lit 

build 

built 

light 

lighted,  lit 

burn 

burned,  burnt 

lose 

lost 

burst 

burst 

make 

made 

buy 

bought 

mean 

meant 

cast 

cast 

pay 

paid 

catch 

caught 

pen 

penned,  pent 

clothe 

clothed,  clad 

put 

put 

cost 

cost 

quit 

quit,  quitted 

creep 

crept 

rend 

rent 

cut 

cut 

rid 

rid 

deal 

dealt 

say 

said 

dream 

dreamed,  dreamt 

seek 

sought 

dwell 

dwelt 

sell 

sold 

feel 

felt 

send 

sent 

flee 

fled 

set 

set 

gild 

gilded,  gilt 

shed 

shed 

gird 

girt,  girded 

shoe 

shod 

have 

had 

shut 

shut 

hear 

heard 

sleep 

slept 

hit 

hit 

sUt 

slit 

hurt 

hurt 

smell 

smelled,  smelt 

keep 

kept 

spell 

spelled,  spelt 

kneel 

knelt 

spend 

spent 

knit 

knit,  knitted 

spill 

spilt 

Verds  and  Their  Several  Kinds, 


369 


spit 

spit 

tell 

told 

split 

split 

think 

thought 

spread 

spread 

thrust 

thrust 

stay 

stayed,  staid 

weep 

wept 

sweat 

sweated,  sweat 

wend 

went 

sweep 

swept 

wet 

wet 

teach 

taught 

work 

worked,  wrought 

These  words  have  the  primitive  monosyllabic  character  of 
the  strong  verbs.  Sixty-three  of  the  seventy-eight  are  native 
Saxon,  and  all  the  others  have  been  long  naturalized  in  the 
language.  Build,  cast,  hit,  split,  and  thrust  are  Scandinavian, 
due  to  intercourse  with  the  Norsemen  and  Danes.  Cut, 
hurt,  and  put  were  received  by  the  Saxons  from  the  Britons. 
Keep,  pen,  and  spend  came  from  the  Latin  so  long  ago  that 
they  found  a  place  in  Saxon  literature.  Catch,  bet,  cost,  and 
quit  were  received  from  the  French  before  the  year  1400. 
It  is  only  old  words  that  are  so  deeply  modified.  Changes 
were  much  more  rapid  in  ages  when  words  were  not  fixed, 
and  in  a  manner  fossilized  by  habits  of  writing  and  printing. 
The  process  was  no  doubt  always  a  natural  one,  and  ap- 
peared quite  so  to  the  several  speakers,  however  strange 
some  of  the  changes  may  seem  to  us.  Let  us  see  if  the 
present  confusion  cannot  be  somewhat  reduced. 

The  seeming  irregularity  of  laid,  paid,  said,  and  staid  is 
only  one  of  spelling. 

Had  and  made  are  shortened  from  havedd^nd.  maked,  which 
are  found  in  old  authors. 

While  -ed  is  fully  written  and  pronounced  only  after  d  or 
t,  there  is  a  tendency  even  there  to  reduce  it  to  mere  -dor  -t, 
in  which  case  it  becomes  unpronounceable.  So  long  as  the 
termination  was  -de  or  -te  it  could  be  sounded,  but  when  all 
final  e  's  were  dropped  from  oral  speech,  -dde  or  -tte  passed 
quickly  into  mere  t.  Especially  was  this  so  when  a  final  -d 
was  preceded  by  /,  n,  or  r.  We  thus  account  in  some  degree 
for  bent,  blent,  built,  gilt,  girt,  lent,  rent,  sent,  spent,  went. 

A  slight  modification  of  the  same  usage  produced  blest, 
burnt,  dwelt,  pent,  smelt,  spelt,  and  spilt. 


370  English  Grammar. 

When  the  vowel  of  the  verb  is  long,  it  is  sometimes  short- 
ened in  adding  -d  or  -/.  In  such  cases  -d  is  added  after  r  or  a 
vowel ;  otherwise  it  is  -/,  to  suit  which  s  takes  a  sharp  sound 
and  V  becomes/" — bereft,  crept,  dealt,  drea^nt ,  felt,  fied,  heard, 
kept,  knelt,  leant,  leapt,  left,  lost,  meant,  shod,  slept,  swept, 
wept. 

But  change  of  vowel  is  the  leading  characteristic  of  the 
strong  verbs,  and  there  are  a  considerable  number  partaking 
of  the  characteristics  of  both.  Such  hybridity  is  of  three 
kinds.  The  same  verb  may  have  strong  and  weak  forms,  as 
showed  and  shown ;  or  the  same  form  may  both  change  the 
vowel  and  add  d,  as  sold  and  told ;  or  there  may  be  forms, 
\\V^  fed  and  led,  that  can  be  construed  either  way.  Such 
verbs  may  with  nearly  equal  propriety  be  placed  in  either 
class. 

When  a  verb  already  ends  in  d  or  t,  and  does  not  add  an- 
other, it  only  remains  for  it  to  shorten  the  vowel,  if  long. 
Regarding  merely  present  form,  light,  lit  is  in  precisely  the 
same  position  as  bite,  bit,  only  that  it  has  reached  it  by  a 
different  process.  To  light  might  have  been  placed  among 
strong  verbs,  if  lit  were  a  well-established  form. 

If  the  verb  ending  in  ^  or  ^  have  already  a  short  vowel, 
there  is  no  change  to  be  made,  and  it  remains  the  same 
throughout — beset,  bet,  burst,  cast,  cost,  cut,  hit,  hurt,  knit,  let, 
put,  quit,  rid,  set,  shed,  shut,  slit,  spit,  split,  spread,  sweat, 
thrust,  wet. 

Eight  have  augh  or  ough  in  the  past  tense.  The  gh  was 
fully  sounded  until  modern  times,  and  was  developed  from 
a  consonant  closely  allied.  The  verbal  part  of  beseech  is  the 
same  as  to  seek,  and  the  ch,  like  that  in  teach,  is  due  to  French 
influence.     We  have  then  : 

Anglo-Saxon  bring-an  brohte  to  bring 

bycg-an  b6hte  to  buy 

s^c-an  s6hte  to  seek 

tsec-an  tsehte  to  teach 

thenc-an  thohte  to  think 

wyrc-an  worhte  to  work 


Verbs  and  Their  Several  Kinds.  371 

In  the  more  modern  wrought  r  has  changed  places  with  the 
vowel,  as  it  often  does.  Catch  is  a  French  word,  and,  when 
introduced,  no  doubt  took  a  preterit  in  imitation  of  such 
words  as  s^can  and  tJecan. 

Clothe  is  an  English  verb  developed  from  the  A.-S.  cldthy 
cloth,  and  is  found  in  early  authors  in  the  forms  clathen, 
clethen^  clothen.  From  the  first  of  these  clad  is  formed  by 
gradually  suppressing  th. 

There  remain  only  sell  and  tell  with  their  past  tenses  sold 
and  told.  Of  these  I  can  only  say  that  they  are  veritable 
hybrids  that,  from  the  time  of  the  Saxons,  have  shared 
equally  in  the  characteristics  of  the  strong  and  the  weak 
verbs. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

AUXILIARY  VERBS. 

We  come  now  to  the  contrivances  by  which  verbs  repre- 
sent not  only  actions,  but  also  many  of  their  attendant  cir- 
cumstances. In  our  language  these  modifications  are  only 
to  a  small  extent  embodied  in  the  verbs  themselves.  They 
are  mostly  indicated  by  a  host  of  little  attendant  words. 
Chief  among  these  are  certain  verbs  that  have  in  various  de- 
grees lost  the  power  of  expressing  anything  when  alone,  and 
have  become  mere  servile  attendants  upon  others.  May, 
will,  shall,  can,  must,  let,  and  ought  are  always  attached  to 
other  verbs,  and  are  called  auxiliaries,  or  helping  verbs. 
But  then  dare,  do,  have,  and  be  also  afford  indispensable  help 
when  not  employed  on  their  own  account.  Besides  their 
use  as  auxiliaries,  most  of  these  verbs  have  something  pecul- 
iar and  exceptional  in  their  formation.  At  present  must 
admits  of  no  change  of  form  under  any  circumstances.  All 
the  others  have  special,  though  obsolescent,  forms  for  the 
second  person  singular.  Ought  has  no  other  variation  than 
that.  May,  shall,  can,  dare,  and  ought  do  not  add  s  to  form 
the  third  person  singular,  for  the  reason  that  in  their  origin 
they  are  past  tenses  of  earlier  verbs,  and  past  tenses  admit 
of  no  variation  for  person  or  number,  except  for  the  second 
person  singular.  All  but  must,  ought,  and  let  have  separate 
forms  for  the  past  tense  as  now  in  use,  combining  the 
characteristics  of  the  strong  and  weak  verbs  : 

may  might  dare  durst 


will 

would 

do 

did 

shall 

should 

have 

had 

can 

could 

Be  is  quite  peculiar. 

372 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  373 

MAY. 

This  word  is  from  a  root  Magh,  which  accounts  for  the  gh 
in  the  past  tense  might.  The  meaning  is  to  be  able,  power- 
ful, mighty.  From  this  source  are  derived  a  large  number 
of  words  in  several  languages,  among  which  are  might,  maiti, 
magnate,  magnitude,  magnificent,  magistrate,  fnaster,  m.istress, 
misSy  maidy  maxim,  mayor,  major,  megatherium.  Gothic 
had  for  the  present  tense  ic  mag,  past  tense  ic  mahta  ;  A-S., 
ic  mceg  and  ic  mihte.  Throughout  both  languages,  and 
English  down  to  the  sixteenth  century,  the  word  was  equiva- 
lent to  our  can.  Jesus  having  asked  the  sons  of  Zebedee  if 
they  were  able  to  partake  of  the  cup  and  the  baptism  soon 
to  be  presented  to  him,  their  answer  was,  in  the  Gothic 
version,  "  Magu  "/  in  A-S.,  "  Wyt  magon  "/  in  the  English 
of  Wycliffe,  "  We  mowenr  Indeed  the  usual  word  for  can 
in  that  early  English  translation  is,  in  the  singular,  may, 
plural  mowe,  mowen,  or  mown.  This  use  of  may  will  further 
appear  from  the  following  examples : 

"  And  thus  he  fleeth  as  fast  as  ever  he  may." 

Chaucer  :  "  Knight's  Tale." 
"  ye  woot  yourself  sche  may  not  wedde  two 
At  oones.         *        *        * 

That  is  to  say,  she  may  nought  have  bothe." — Id. 
"  be  my  feth  sayd  the  doughete  doglas  agayn,  I  wyll  let  that 
hontyng  yf  that  I  may." — "  Ancient  Ballad  of  Chevy  Chase." 

A  trace  of  this  usage  lingers  here  and  there  in  the  Bible. 
So  great  was  the  ferocity  of  the  maniac,  or  maniacs,  that 
lodged  in  the  tombs  of  Gadara,  "  that  no  man  might  pass  by 
that  way."     The  revised  version  substitutes  could. 

All  idea  of  power  has  now  departed  from  the  word,  and 
left  it  to  express  :  ist,  permission  ;  2d,  supposed  possibility  ; 
3d,  a  somewhat  varying  sense,  always  containing  an  unde- 
termined element. 

"  May  I  open  the  window  a  little  ?    You  may." 

This  may  be  taken  at  present  as  the  primary  meaning  of 
the  word.     The  secondary  may  be  found  in  such  sentences 


374-  English  Grammar. 

as :  "  It  may  rain  before  night  ";  "  He  may  recover  yet  *'; 
"  I  may  draw  a  prize  in  the  lottery."  Mrs.  Toodles  thought 
that  she  might  yet  have  a  daughter ;  and  that  daughter  might 
grow  up,  and  might  marry  a  man  named  Thompson,  who 
might  write  his  name  with  a  /,  in  which  event  a  particular 
old  door-plate  would  just  suit.  In  short,  a  thing  that  may 
happen  is  one  that  is  looked  upon  as  not  absolutely 
impossible. 

In  the  third  class  of  cases  no  doubt  is  felt  but  that  some- 
thing will  occur ;  it  is  only  its  precise  character  or  extent 
that  is  uncertain  : 

"The  past  is  safe,  whatever  the  future  may  be." 
"  Notice  !     To  all  whom  it  may  concern." 

Here  it  is  not  questioned  that  there  is  to  be  a  future,  or 
that  some  will  be  concerned ;  the  details  alone  are  indeter- 
minate : 

"  and  it  shall  be  its  duty  to  make  arrangements,  *  *  * 
And  for  the  purpose  of  defraying  the  expenses  of  said  joint  com- 
mittee, and  of  carrying  out  the  arrangements  which  it  may  make, 
three  thousand  dollars,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary." 

U.  S.  Statutes,  25,  980. 

In  such  connections  shall  is  sometimes  used  instead  of 
may  ;  but  the  fundamental  meaning  of  shall  is  widely  differ- 
ent, and  there  is  an  inconvenience  in  having  two  words  of 
the  same  length  with  an  uncertainty  which  of  them  ought 
to  be  employed. 

WILL  and  SHALL. 

These  two  words  are  so  interlaced  in  usage  that  they  can 
best  be  considered  together.  If  has  been  often  said  that  no 
Englishman  ever  mistakes  will  and  shall.  I  think  it  would 
be  much  nearer  the  truth  to  say  that  none  ever  used  these 
two  words  consistently  throughout. 

Another  wise  saw,  put  forth  quite  as  often  and  as  confi- 
dently, is  to  the  effect  that  the  prevailing  error  lies  in  putting 
will  in  the  place  of  shall.      So  too  I  think  that  the  great 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  375 

abuse  is  the  undue  frequency  of  shall.  I  scarcely  open  a 
book  or  paper  without  finding  it  sprinkled  with  shalVs,  as  if 
they  had  been  dispensed  from  a  pepper-box.  Grammarians 
tell  a  merry  tale  of  a  mythical  Frenchman  who  fell  into  the 
water  and  exclaimed :  "I  will  be  drowned ;  no  one  shall 
help  me  ";  yet  whatever  error  there  is  in  this  sentence  can 
be  found  equally  with  many  who  are  not  Frenchmen. 

"  I  will  be  ill,  will  be  very  ill,  if  I  cannot  hear  you  are  better 
before  I  go." — Richardson  :  "  Clarissa  Harlowe." 

"  However  small  a  society  may  be  if  it  is  a  human  one  jealousy 
shall  creep  in." 

Charles  Reade  :  "  Never  too  Late  to  Mend,"  ch.  liL 

"  there  is  no  creature  loves  me, 
and  if  I  die,  no  soule  shall  pittie  me." 

Shakesp.  :  Richard  II.,  v.,  2. 

In  regard  to  form,  it  is  only  necessary  to  say  that  would 
and  should  are  obtained  by  successive  reductions  of  the 
older  forms  wollede  and  shullede.  Of  these  two  important 
auxiliaries  will  has  been  much  the  best  preserved  and  most 
consistently  employed.  The  original  meaning,  so  far  as  we 
need  inquire,  is  voluntary  choice,  intention,  or  consent.  It 
expresses  generally  not  a  mere  idle  wish,  but  a  resolution 
taken  with  the  consciousness  of  power  to  give  it  effect.  But 
such  a  resolution  is  likely  to  be  carried  out,  and  to  announce 
it  is  to  predict  the  event.  It  thus  naturally  passes  into  an 
expression  of  the  future ;  and  in  good  English  is  to  this  day 
the  most  positive  declaration  of  a  future  event  certain  to 
take  place. 

"  I  view  it  as  a  student  of  political  economy  ;  and  *  *  *  apply 
to  it  the  principles  which  I  know  will  have  their  way,  no  matter 
how  formidable  the  attempt  to  defeat  their  operation."  * 

As  will  expresses  a  determination  of  the  mind,  and  every 
one  ought  to  know  his  own  mind  best,  it  is  naturally  asso- 
ciated with  the  first  person.  This  has  at  some  periods  been 
the  usage  in  a  very  marked  degree,  while  at  other  times  / 

'  North  A  titer.  Rev.,  February,  1889.     The  italics  are  the  author's. 


2)^6  English  Grammar. 

will  has  been  intentionally  avoided.  Notwithstanding  the 
great  prevalence  of  shall  in  the  Bible,  /  shall  is  of  rare  occur- 
rence, as  will  be  seen  hereafter. 

Will,  in  Gothic,  and  generally  in  Anglo-Saxon,  expressed 
volition,  not  futurity.  There  was  always  an  element  of  free 
action.  It  is  very  rare  to  find  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  Gospels 
future  action  indicated  by  will.  Shall  is  still  more  rare. 
The  probable  reason  is  that  an  archaic  style  is  chosen  for 
religious  writings ;  for  before  pure  Saxon  ceased  to  be  writ- 
ten will  was  employed  to  express  the  future ;  but  it  was  the 
future  of  free,  unconstrained  action,  and  generally  took  the 
form  of  " / will''  In  translating  the  following  passage  from 
^Ifric's  "  Homily  on  the  Good  Shepherd  "  I  shall  mark  the 
word  by  italics. 

"  Wherefore  I  will  require  the  sheep  at  your  hands,  and  I  make 
you  depart  from  the  fold,  and  I  will  rid  my  flock  of  you.  I  my- 
self will  gather  my  sheep  that  were  scattered,  and  I  will  keep 
them  in  rich  pasture :  those  that  were  lost  will  I  seek  and  lead 
back  ;  those  that  were  lamed  I  heal ;  the  weak  I  will  strengthen, 
and  restrain  the  strong." 

Observe  that  the  present  is  twice  used  without  any  aux- 
iliary for  the  future,  as  was  the  common  usage  at  a  still 
earlier  date.  Elsewhere  the  expression  is  " /  will"  never 
/  shall ;  and  the  idea  to  be  conveyed  is  that  of  voluntary 
resolve  to  be  carried  out  in  the  future.  So  will  has  con- 
tinued to  express  volition  and  futurity  combined  in  all 
possible  proportions,  like  a  parallelogram  divided  into  two 
triangles,  the  one  end  being  occupied  exclusively  by  the  one 
and  the  opposite  extremity  by  the  other : 


Often  in  the  Bible  it  has  no  reference  to  the  future,  but  ex- 
presses purpose  or  willingness. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  377 

"  And  behold  there  came  a  leper  and  worshipped  him,  saying, 
Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou  canst  make  me  clean.  And  Jesus  put 
forth  his  hand  and  touched  him,  saying,  I  will ;  be  thou  clean." 

"*  I  will  "  obviously  means  in  this  case,  "  I  am  willing," 
and  it  will  be  seen  that  it  is  not  an  auxiliary  verb.  As  an 
independent  verb  it  formerly  expressed  a  desire,  and  even  a 
command. 

"  I  will  that  thou  give  me  by  and  by  in  a  charger  the  head  of 
John  the  Baptist." — Matt,  vi.,  24. 

"  And  with  that  word  she  gave  him  kisse  ; 
And  prayed  him  rise  and  saide  she  woulde 
His  welfare." 

Chaucer's  "  Dream,"  650. 

But  would,  expressive  of  desire,  was  also  used  as  if  it  were 
a  present  of  secondary  growth. 

*'  Sorrow  would  sollace,  and  mine  Age  would  ease." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Henry  VI.,"  part  ii.,  ii.,  3. 

"  I  would  thou  wert  cold  or  hot." — Rev.   iii.,  15. 

"  His  legions  he  committed  unto  Cn.  Octavius  whom  he  willed 
to  meet  him  there  by  land." 

"  He  willed  them  to  consider  what  they  had  deserved." 

Sir  Walter  Raleigh. 

This  modern  past  tense,  willed,  is  still  preserved  where 
the  verb  is  independent  and  employed  in  a  peculiar  sense — 
**  He  willed  the  farm  to  his  youngest  son."  Indeed  one 
will  may  be  auxiliary  to  another — "  I  will  will  the  dwelling- 
house  to  you." 

Even  as  an  auxiliary  will  had  at  times  scarcely  a  trace  of 
futurity. 

"  Ye  will  not  come  unto  me  that  ye  might  have  life." 

It  was  not  the  future  action,  but  the  then  present  unwilling- 
ness, of  the  Jews  that  was  reprehended.  We  have  seen, 
however,  that  will  was  an  auxiliary,  expressing  futurity,  with 
more  or  less  of  voluntary  choice,  long  before  the  Norman 


378  English  Grammar. 

Conquest.  It  has  continued  so  to  the  present  day,  but  has 
sometimes  had  a  hard  fight  to  hold  its  own  against  shall.  I 
here  introduce  a  very  few  illustrations  out  of  many  to  show 
how  nearly  the  very  early  usage  agreed  with  the  very 
modern,  giving  a  close  translation  where  the  original  might 
be  unintelligible  to  the  general  reader 

"  He  will  make  a  judgment  day  with  his  chosen." 

"  Homily  on  Easter,"  a.d.  1200. 

"  Now  I  will  give  him  peace, 
And  let  him  speak  with  me. 
I  will  not  slay  nor  hang  him. 
What  he  asketh  I  will  do. 
Hostages  I  will  have, 
Of  his  highest  men." 

Layamon,  1205. 

"  Be  a  child  never  so  dear, 
Naughty  tricks  it  will  learn. 

Beat  it  sometimes  ; 
Might  it  have  all  its  will, 
Willy  nilly  it  will  spoil. 

And  become  a  fool," 

"  Tell  never  thy  foeman 
Thy  loss  or  thy  shame, 

Thy  care  or  thy  woe  ; 
He  will  strive,  if  he  may. 
By  night  and  by  day. 
Of  one  to  make  two." 

"  Proverbs  of  Handing,"  1307. 

"  But  I  swear  now  truly  that  sin  will  I  hinder." 

"^^ Piers  the  Plowman,"  1362. 

Shall  forms  in  several  respects  a  contrast  to  will.  The 
latter  has  a  participle,  willing,  serving  as  an  adjective  and 
an  infinitive.  St.  Paul  could  say,  "  to  will  is  present  with 
me "  ;  but  shalling,  or  to  shall,  has  scarcely  been  heard 
within  a  thousand  years.  Thus  will  has  still  a  trace  of  in- 
dependence, but  shall  is  reduced    to   complete  servitude. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  379 

Will  started  from  a  germ  of  free  volition  ;  it  was  automatic, 
originating  in  the  conscious  choice  of  the  actor.  Shall  ex- 
pressed an  external  compulsion,  authority,  necessity,  or 
obligation.  And,  strange  to  say,  an  American  writer  of  our 
time,  in  advocating  a  larger  use  of  shall,  has  insisted 
that  there  is  quite  too  much  exercise  of  the  will  among  us, 
as  if  it  were  not  becoming  a  free  people  to  act  voluntarily, 
rather  than  from  constraint. 

For  the  meaning  oi  shall  it  is  not  necessary  to  seek  farther 
than  the  Teutonic  root,  skal,  to  owe  a  debt.  The  practice 
of  requiring  a  pecuniary  compensation  for  offences  led  to  a 
widespread  confusion  of  the  distinct  ideas  of  crime  and 
debt.  Whichever  had  the  priority,  both  were  embodied  in 
this  word.  It  is  not  ennobled  by  its  pedigree.  As  relics  of 
the  criminal  side  there  remain  the  German  Schuld,  a  crime, 
schuldig,  guilty,  and  Unschuld,  innocence.  There  were  in 
Gothic  three  shades  of  meaning  easily  distinguished. 

First,  to  owe  a  debt : 

Goth. — "  ains  skalda  skatte  fimf  hunda,  ith  anthar  fimf  tiguns." 
A.-S. — "  an  sceolde  fif  hund  penega,  and  other  fiftig." 
Eng. — "the  one  owed  ^ve  hundred  pence,  and  the  other  fifty." 

Luke  vii.,  41. 

Goth. — "  Whan  filu  skalt  frauyin  meinamma  ?  " 
A.-S. — "  Hu  mycel  scealt  thu  minum  hlaforde  ?  " 
Eng. — "  How  much  owest  thou  unto  my  lord  ?  " 

Luke  xvi.,  5. 

From  the  same  source  were  derived  the  words  for  debt 
and  debtor. 

Second :  It  had  the  indefinite  sense  of  obligation  which 
we  express  by  ought  and  should. 

Goth.  "  Yah  yus  skuluth  izwis  misso  thwahan  fotuns." 
A.-S.  "  Ge  sceolen  eac  thwean  selc  others  fet." 
Eng.  "  Ye  also  ought  to  wash  one  another's  feet." 

John  xiii.,  14. 

Third,  and  closely  allied,  is  the  sense  of  the  inevitable 
which  we  usually  express  by  must : 


380  Engli'ih  Grammar. 

Goth.  "  Yains  skal  wahsyan,  ith  ik  minznan." 
Eng.  "  He  must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease," 

John  iii.,  30. 

It  is  the  verb  employed  in  such  passages  as : 

"  Wist  ye  not  that  I  musi  be  about  my  Father's  business  ?  " 
"  I  must  preach  the  gospel  in  other  cities  also." 
"  The  Son  of  Man  must  suffer  many  things." 
"  It  was  meet  that  we  should  make  merry." 

Beyond  this  the  word  gradually  loses  its  distinctive  char- 
acter and  passes  insensibly  and  in  a  few  instances  into  little 
more,  that  we  can  see,  than  a  mere  sign  of  future  time : 

"  Seimon,  skal  thus  wha  qithan." 

"  Simon,  I  have  somewhat  to  say  unto  thee." — Luke  vii.,  40. 

"  Wha  skuli  thata  barn  wairthan  ?  " 

"  What  manner  of  child  shall  this  be  " — Luke  i.,  bd. 

**  Whadre  sa  skuli  gaggan  ?  " 

"Whither  will  he  go  ?" — John  vii.,  35. 

In  Anglo-Saxon  shall  had  nearly  the  same  shades  of 
meaning  as  in  Gothic,  starting  from  the  idea  of  a  debt  grow- 
ing out  of  either  a  contract  or  a  crime.  It  expressed  also  the 
idea  of  rightfully  belonging  or  pertaining.  And  as  that  right- 
fulness was  often  declared  or  even  established  by  royal  or 
other  authority,  it  grew  to  be  the  regular  formula  for  ex- 
pressing such  authority — in  short,  a  phrase  of  enactment. 

"  Gif  se  thuma  bith  of  aslegen,  tham  sceal  xxx  scill.  to  bote." 
"  If  the  thumb  be  chopped  off,  30  shillings  shall  the  compen- 
sation therefor" — not  shall  be. — "  Laws  of  King  Alfred." 
"  Thys  Godspel  sceal  on  Cilda  Msesse  Dseg." 
"  This  Gospel  shall  on  Childermas  Day."—"  Alfred's  Gospels." 
"  Thissynt  tha  domas  the  thu  him  settan  scealt." 
"  These  are  the  judgments  which  thou  shall  set  them." 

"  Alfred's  Decrees." 

As  mere  signs  of  future  time  will  and  shall  are  exceptional 
both  in  Gothic  and  Saxon,  both  of  which  were  generally  con- 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  381 

tent  with  the  present  tense.  Still  both  words  came  in  time 
to  be  used  to  form  a  future  previously  wanting  :  with  this 
difference,  however,  that  our  Saxon,  and  still  more  our 
Anglish,  ancestors  favored  will  in  preference  to  shall  more 
than  the  other  branches  of  the  Teutonic  stock.  For  a  long 
time  the  distinction  was  very  strongly  marked,  will  express- 
ing free  volition  and  shall  authority,  compulsion,  obliga- 
tion. Here  is  an  example  from  A.  D.  1200,  with  modern- 
ized spelling,  in  which  the  distinction  is  well  preserved  : 

"And  left  all  that  they  should ^o,  and  did  what  they  would." ^ 
"  I  will  teach  them 
I  can  be  either,  if  I  shall  [must],  healer  of  body  or  soul." 

From  the  same. 
Authority,  Threatening. 
"  ye  sinned  as  long  as  ye  lived,  and  ye  shall  burn  as  long  as  I 
live."— "Old  English  Homily,"  a.  d.  1150. 

Authority  of  Law. 
"  On  whom  the  lot  falleth 
He  shall  go  from  the  land. 
The  five  shall  remain, 
The  sixth  shall  go  forth, 
Away  from  his  people." — Layamon. 

JVecessity. 
"  for  fare  leuer  he  hadde  wende. 
And  bidde  ys  mete,  3ef  he  schulde  in  a  strange  land." 
Robert  of  Gloucester,  1298. 

This  is  like  the  example  given  by  Professor  Earle,  who 
heard  an  English  yeoman  remark,  on  setting  up  a  land- 
mark : 

"  There,  that  ono  '11  stand  for  twenty  years,  if  he  should" — 
meaning,  if  there  be  need  for  it. 

Desire  and  Necessity. 
"  He  who  will  have  full  power,  shall  first  take  heed  that  he 
have  power  over  his  own  temper.'' — "  King  Alfred's  Boethius." 

'  Morris  :  '*  Specimens  of  Early  English,"  i.,  213.    * 


382  English  Grammar. 

But  shall  gained  ground  rapidly,  and  by  the  middle  of  the 
fourteenth  century  had  become  the  common  sign  of  the 
future,  and  confined  will  almost  entirely  to  the  expression 
of  desire  or  intention.  Thenceforward  the  latter  kept  slowly 
and  irregularly  regaining  and  enlarging  its  original  domain 
until  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century.  At  present  two 
tendencies  are  visible,  that  of  some  to  revert  to  the  use  of 
shall,  of  others  to  extend  still  further  the  use  of  will,  which 
latter  seems  to  me  the  normal  trend  of  the  English  language. 
In  a  published  extract  from  a  letter  of  President  Harrison  to 
Mr.  Blaine  the  writer  says  three  times  "  I  will,''  but  nowhere 
"  I  shall."  This  is  only  one  of  many  instances ;  and  one 
who  should  accuse  the  President  of  not  knowing  his  mother 
tongue  must  be  unaware  that  languages  are  moving,  chan- 
ging things,  that,  as  in  that  instance,  a  movement  may  be  in 
one  direction  for  five  hundred  years,  and  one  may  be  at  the 
head  or  tail  of  it. 

Here  follow  some  of  the  exploits  of  shall  m  the  heyday  of 
its  power,  when  it  aspired  to  universal  dominion  in  the 
language : 

"  And  so  dide  they  before  him,  that  weren  his  Auncestres : 
and  so  shulle  thei  that  comen  aftre  him." 

Sir  John  Mandeville,  1356. 

"  If  the  Kyng  be  peer,  he  schal  of  necessity  make  his  Gyfts 
and  Rewards  by  Assignements,  for  which  he  schal  have  but  little 
thanke."  Sir  John  Fortescue,  1480. 

"Loo  !  myn  herte  swete,  this  ylle  dyet  shuld  make  you  pale  & 
wan,"  "The  Nut-Brown  Maid,"  1500. 

Sir  Thomas  More  declares  six  times  in  one  sentence  that 
Christ  shall  presently  do  certain  things. 

"  Whosoever  will  practise  physike,  not  having  these  aforesaid 
sciences  shall  kill  more  than  he  shall  save." 

"Breviary  of  Health,"  1575. 

"  Or  if  they  aborce  not,  yet  they  shall  be  deliuered  with  great 
paine,  and  the  birth  shall  be  very  weake  and  sickly,  so  that  it 
shall  dye  streight ;  or  if  it  dye  not  by  and  by,  it  shall  prove  but 
very  slenderly."  "  Birth  of  Mankind,"  1604. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  383 

"  Cassio.  I  will  aske  him  for  my  Place  againe,  he  shall  tell 
me  I  am  a  drunkard."  "Othello,"  ii.,  3. 

In  the  majority  of  instances  Shakespeare's  shall  expresses 
merely  futurity ;  yet  it  is  sometimes  a  word  of  authority  : 

"  Sicin.  It  is  a  minde  that  shall  remain  a  poison  where  it  is, 
not  poyson  any  further. 

"  Corio.     Shall  remaine  ? 

"  Hear  you  this  Triton  of  the  Minnowes  ?  Marke  you  His  abso- 
lute ShalU  "  "  Coriolanus,"  iii.,  i. 

"  Afar.     He  must  be  buried  with  his  brethren. 
"  Titus'  Sons.     And  shall,  or  him  we  will  accompany. 
"  Titus.     And  shall !    What  villaine  was  it  spake  that  word  ?" 

"  Titus  Andronicus,"  i.,  2. 

"  He  must  be  told  on  't,  and  he  shall." 

"  Winter's  Tale,"  i.,  2. 

We  thus  see  that  shall  is  an  imperious  word,  and  much 
stronger  than  must. 

"  These  stars  arise  in  the  16  degree  of  Taurus  ;  but  in  the  lati- 
tude 50,  they  ascend  in  the  eleventh  degree  of  the  same,  that  is  5 
dayes  sooner ;  so  shall  it  be  summer  unto  London  before  it  be 
unto  Toledo."  Sir  Thomas  Browne's  "  Pseudodoxia." 

"  an  unskilful  author  shall  run  these  metaphors  so  absurdly  into 
one  another  that  there  shall  hQ  no  simile." — Spectator,  No.  595. 

"  One  man  shall  ask  how  you  do  *  *  *  another  shall  beg  a 
pinch  of  snuff." — Id.,  April  29,  17 15. 

If  the  last  two  examples  are,  as  they  seem  to  be,  due  to 
affectation  of  an  antiquated  style,  what  are  we  to  think  of 
the  following,  committed  to  print  in  the  year  of  grace  1884? 

"  You  shall  see  a  lovely  bright  creature,  with  all  the  external 
evidences  of  culture  *  *  *  so  long  as  she  is  silent  ;  but  let 
her  open  her  pretty  lips,  and  she  shall  pierce  your  ear  with  a 
mean,  thin,  nasal,  rasping  tone."  ' 

'  "  Every-Day  English,"  by  Richard  Grant  White,  page  93. 


384 


English  Grammar, 


Shall  pierce  ?  "  Hear  you  this  Triton  of  the  Minnowes  ?  " 
It  has  not  been  my  lot  to  hear  anything  of  the  kind  from 
"  lovely  bright  creatures." 

The  varying  prevalence  of  will  and  shall  may  be  roughly 
shown,  as  in  the  following  table,  by  taking  one  hundred  con- 
secutive future  tenses  in  any  author,  and  showing  how  many 
are  made  with  these  auxiliaries  respectively.  In  regard  to 
versions  of  the  Scriptures,  in  order  to  have  a  broader  basis 
I  have  taken  the  whole  four  Gospels,  and  have  omitted 
the  forms  would  and  should,  taking  only  the  direct  will  and 
shall.  Will,  when  not  an  auxiliary,  has  been  excluded 
throughout. 


WILL. 

SHALL. 

I  WILL. 

I  SHALL. 

Layamon 

A.D. 1205 

72 

28 

31 

3 

Robert  of  Gloucester 

1298 

58 

42 

6 

9 

Robert  Manning 

1303 

40 

60 

Dan  Michel 

1340 

z(> 

64 

5 

Sir  John  Mandeville 

1356 

35 

65 

12 

Gospels  by  Wycliffe 

1389 

23 

1,506 

5 

114 

Reginald  Pecock 

1449 

17 

^l 

Sir  John  Fortescue 

1470 

31 

69 

William  Tyndale 

1528 

41 

59 

Gospels  by  Tyndale 

236 

964 

97 

24 

Sir  Thomas  More 

1532 

42 

58 

6 

6 

Nicholas  Udall 

1553 

57 

43 

29 

Sir  Philip  Sidney 

1580 

48 

52 

3 

5 

Bacon's  "  Advancement 

of  Learning  " 

1605 

60 

40 

12 

12 

Authorized  Gospels 

1611 

244 

962 

94 

II 

John  Locke 

1687 

77 

23 

8 

Samuel  Johnson 

1750 

70 

30 

I 

19 

Edmund  Burke 

1780 

64 

z(> 

3 

19 

The  Federalist 

1788 

76 

24 

3 

3 

George  Washington 

83 

17 

3 

12 

The  fate  of  "  /  will,"  under  which  may  be  included  "  we 
will"  has  been  curious.  At  first  the  obvious  propriety  of 
each  one's  knowing  and  declaring  his  own  will  was  admitted. 
After  a  time,  that  form  of  expression  for  a  mere  future  was 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  385 

swept  away  by  the  flood-tide  of  shall.  By  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury people  began  again  to  see  the  logical  consistency  of 
saying  "  /  will  "/  but  three  hundred  years  later  the  excessive 
and  affected  modesty  of  modern  times  forbade  any  one  to 
assert  his  own  will,  except  under  extraordinary  circum- 
stances, and  so  we  generally  say  "  /  shallT  By  using  this 
expression  I  seem  to  shirk  all  responsibility,  and  pretend 
that  some  external  force  or  influence  constrains  me. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  consider  the  frequency  of  shall 
in  the  Bible.  It  has  been  attributed  to  the  authoritative 
character  of  the  utterances.  That  is  no  doubt  true  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  precisely  as  it  is  true  of  the  "  Statutes  of  New 
York"  or  the  "Articles  of  War";  but  very  little  searching 
of  the  Scriptures  will  satisfy  any  one  that  this  principle  does 
not  cover  the  whole  ground.  Shall  is  properly  used  only  by 
one  in  authority ;  but  in  the  Bible  it  is  in  the  mouths  of  all 
alike.   The  servant  of  him  who  owned  the  barren  fig-tree  says : 

"  Lord,  let  it  alone  this  year  also,  till  I  shall  dig  about  it,  and 
dung  it  :  and  if  it  bear  fruit,  well  ;  and  if  not,  then  after  that 
thou  shalt  cut  it  down." — Luke  xiii.,  8. 

A  modern  servant  would  not  say  to  his  master,  "You  shall 
cut  it  down,"  but  "  You  cany  Again,  one  having  authority 
does  not  command  or  threaten  anything  at  variance  with  his 
own  character  and  sentiments. 

"  For  many  shall  come  in  my  name,  saying,  I  am  Christ ;  and 
shall  deceive  many.  *  *  *  For  nation  shall  rise  against  nation 
and  kingdom  against  kingdom,  and  there  shall  be  famines  and 
pestilences,  and  earthquakes  in  divers  places. 

"  All  these  are  the  beginning  of  sorrows. 

"  Then  shall  they  deliver  you  up  to  be  afflicted,  and  shall  kill 
you  ;  and  ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  nations  for  my  name's  sake. 

"  And  then  shall  many  be  offended,  and  shall  betray  one 
another,  and  shall  hate  one  another. 

'*  And  many  false  prophets  shall  a.nse  and  shall  deceive  many." 

Matt,  xxiv.,  5-1 1. 

It  would  be  inconsistent  with  all  ideas  ever  entertained  of 
Jesus  to  think  these  calamities  and  wrongs  ordered,  intended 


386  English  Grammar. 

or  desired  by  him,  or  to  look  on  the  words  as  any  other  than 
a  most  sorrowful  prediction.  Evidently  shall  was  merely 
an  expression  of  futurity.  Very  generally,  but  not  always  as 
consistently,  will,  in  the  Bible,  expressed  volition.  The 
distinction  is  sometimes  finely  preserved  : 

Voluntary  Future  :  "  I  will  arise  and  go  to  my  father,  and  will 
say  unto  him,"  etc. — Luke  xv.,  18. 

Involuntary  Future  :  "  But  now  he  is  dead,  wherefore  should  I 
fast  ?  Can  I  bring  him  back  again  ?  I  s^all  go  to  him,  but  he 
sAall  not  return  to  me." — 2  Samuel  xii.,  23. 

Will  and  sMll :  "  And  Barak  said  unto  her,  If  thou  wilt  go  with 
me,  then  I  will  go  ;  but  if  thou  wilt  not  go  with  me,  then  I 
will  not  go. 

"  And  she  said,  I  will  surely  go  with  thee  :  notwithstanding  the 
journey  that  thou  takest  s^all  not  be  for  thine  honor  ;  for  the 
Lord  sliall  sell  Sisera  into  the  hand  of  a  woman." 

Judges  iv.,  8,  9. 

This  prevailing  use  of  sAall  to  express  the  future  can  be, 
to  some  extent,  accounted  for.  The  first  translation  of  the 
Scriptures  into  what  people  of  the  present  day  could  recog- 
nize as  English  was  that  begun  by  Wycliffe,  1360,  and 
finished  by  Purvey  about  1390.  It  was  at  a  time  when  the 
use  of  s/iall  was  at  its  height  ;  and  we  have  seen  that  in  that 
version  sAall  was  to  will  as  65  to  i.  As  Wycliffe  was  in 
his  time  a  heretic,  and  as  the  later  translations  were  made 
by  Protestants,  this  one  must  naturally  have  had  considera- 
ble influence  on  that  of  Tyndale,  which  was  next  in  order  of 
time.  That,  too,  was  made  while  the  use  of  sliall  was  pre- 
ponderant, as  will  be  seen  by  our  table.  Tyndale's  transla- 
tion was  so  happy  in  its  selection  of  pure  English,  and  in 
rendering  for  the  first  time  the  original  texts  into  the  ver- 
nacular, that  it  has  done  more  to  preserve  our  mother  tongue 
than  the  work  of  any  other  man ;  and  if  it  were  read  in  our 
churches  to-day,  it  would  sound  to  most  hearers  perfectly 
familiar.  All  succeeding  translators  and  editors  have  made 
but  little  change.     King  James's  translators  were  instructed 


Auxiliary  Verbs. 


387 


to  deviate  from  the  former  editions  as  little  as  the  duty 
of  faithful  translation  would  permit.  With  that  religious 
instinct  that  clings  to  the  old,  the  recent  revisors  of  the  text 
took  special  pains  to  preserve  the  antique  phraseology ;  so 
that  the  English-speaking  Protestant  everywhere  has  before 
him  a  style  of  speech  that  is  three  hundred  and  fifty  years 
old. 

The  next  point  to  be  presented  is  that  writers  are  not 
generally  consistent  in  using  will  and  shall,  and  often  employ 
them  alternately  merely  to  vary  the  expression.  In  the  fol- 
lowing examples  I  shall  place  the  two  on  opposite  sides  of 
the  page,  and  the  reader  can  amuse  himself  in  finding  reasons 
for  the  distinction. 


"  Where  shall  he  go  ?  " 

John  vii.,  35,  according 
to  the  Gothic. 


"  Where  will  he  go  ?  " 

Anglo-Saxon. 


"  Also  there  is  a  pond,  the 
water  there  hath  wonderwork- 
ing ;  for  though  a  whole  host 
stood  by  the  pond  and  turned 
the  face  thitherward,  the  water 
would  draw  them  violently  tow- 
ard the  pond  and  wet  all  her 
clothes  ; 

"  This  charge  woll  alway  be 
gret ;  and  so  inestimable  gret, 
that  in  some  yere  a  gret  Lords 

"  The  Time  will  come 
(thus  did  he  follow  it) 


"  We  foreknow  that  the  Sunne 
will  rise  and  that  after  the 
winter 


so  should  horses  be  drawn  in 
the  same  wise." 

John  of  Trevisa. 


Lyvelood  schall  not  suffice  to 
beere  it." 

Sir  John  Fortescue. 

The  Time  shall  come  that  foule 

Sinne  gathering  head, 

Shall  break  into  corruption." 

Shakesp.  :  2  "  Henry  iv.," 
iii.,  I. 

the  spring  shall  come." 

Raleigh. 


388 


English  Grammar, 


"  Neither  shall  it  be  needful     it  will  be    enough    to    relate  " 
to  set  down   apart  the  several     etc.  Id. 

authorities     *     *     * 


"  A  metaphysician  will  bring 
ploughing  and  gardening  imme- 
diately to  abstract  notions, 


"  Howbeit  when  he,  the  spirit 
of  truth  is  come,  he  will  guide 
you  into  all  truth  : 
and  he  will  show  you  things  to 
come 

"  And   he  will  shew   you   a 
large   upper   room    furnished." 
Matt,  xiv.,  15, 

"  If  any  author  shall  trans- 
mit a  summary  of  his  works, 
we  shall  willingly  receive  it  ; 

"  This  will  be  a  busy  ses- 
sion ; 


an  alchemist,  on  the  contrary, 
shall  reduce  divinity  to  the 
maxims   of   his  laboratory," 

Locke  "  On  the  Understand- 
ing." 

for  he  shall  not  speak  of  him- 
self ;  but  whatsoever  he  shall 
hear,  that  shall  he  speak." 

John  xvi.,  13. 

"  And  he  shall  shew  yoU   a 
large  upper   room   furnished." 
Luke  xxii.,  12. 

if  any  literary  anecdote  *  *  * 
be  communicated  to  us,  we  will 
carefully  insert  it." 

Johnson. 

shall  you  prepare  for  it  ?  " 

BuLWER  Lytton,  in  "  Pel- 
ham." 


"  Will  you  recognize  your  *'  Shall  you  lack  clothes,  or  a 
kinsman  if  he  passes  in  this  roof  to  shelter  you  between  this 
crowd  ?  "  point  and  the  grave  ?  " 

Hawthorne. 


"  Shall  you  be  late  ? 


Will    he    be     late.    Cousin 
Hortense  ? " — Charlotte 
Bronte,  in  **  Shirley." 


"  He  will  talk  to  you  of   a  which    you    shall    not    under- 

host  of  matters  stand."         Prof.  Whitney. 

"  Rose   said   very   decidedly  Lady  Charlotte  said  she  would 

she  should  be  in  town  for  the  have  an  evening  specially  for 

winter.  her."         "  Robert  Elsmere." 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  389 

"  Three  fourths  of  all  money     the  remaining  one  fourth  shall 
thus  secured  will  be  added  to     be  distributed,"  etc. 
the   *   *   *   the  hospital  fund  ;         "  Decision   of    the   Sec'y   of 

War,"  Nov.  14,  1888. 

The  regulations  of  the  Military  School  at  Fort  Leaven- 
worth, issued  by  the  War  Department,  March  27,  1888, 
convey  the  behests  of  authority  by  the  use  of  90  shalls 
and  15  wills.  No  distinction  between  them  is  maintained, 
and  the  latter  seem  to  be  employed  merely  to  vary  the 
expression. 

Such  examples  might  be  multiplied  to  any  extent.  Hence 
one  is  surprised  to  find  Professor  Earle  saying : 

'*  that  large  numbers  of  our  English-speaking  fellow  subjects 
cannot  seize  the  distinction  between  shall,  should  and  will,  would. 
Here  is  a  distinction  which  is  unerringly  observed  by  the  most 
rustic  people  in  the  purely  English  counties,  while  the  most  care- 
fully educated  persons  who  have  grown  up  on  Keltic  soil  cannot 
seize  it.  This  Kelticism  is  by  no  means  rare  in  Sir  Walter  Scott's 
works.' 

It  would  have  been  a  real  gratification  to  have  the  distinc- 
tion stated  by  one  so  competent,  and  to  learn  whether  it  is 
known  to  any  besides  "  the  most  rustic  people." 

We  are  now  prepared  to  ask,  and  in  part  to  answer,  the 
question  :  When  are  will  and  shall  respectively  to  be  used  ? 
I  shall  lay  down  no  rule  or  definition  for  things  so  vagrant. 
One  might  as  well  undertake  to  define  geometrically  the 
figure  of  Celebes.  I  shall  start  from  fixed  points  that  are 
safe  from  dispute,  and  try  to  develop  thence  the  use  of  the 
words.  Owing  to  the  modesty  or  sensitiveness  that  shrinks 
from  saying  "  I  "  and  "  thou,"  the  first  and  second  persons 
are  not  what  they  would  be  were  there  no  disturbing  influ- 
ence, and  therefore  are  not  proper  to  begin  with.  The  third 
person,  especially  if  not  a  person  at  all,  but  a  mere  idea  or  a 
thing  inanimate,  may  be  spoken  of  without  fear  or  favor,  in 
undistorted  words.     One  further  general  remark  is  proper : 

'  '*  Philology  of  the  English  Tongue,"  239. 


390  English  Grammar, 

the  choice  of  the  auxiliary  never  depends  on  the  circum- 
stance that  the  subject  is  singular  or  plural. 

I.  Although  will  expressed  originally  an  act  of  volition, 
in  the  present  age,  when  no  conditions  are  expressed  or 
implied,  and  all  disturbing  influences  are  eliminated,  it  is 
the  normal  and  explicit  expression  of  futurity.  Presump- 
tion is  in  favor  of  will,  and  any  other  claimant  for  its  place 
should  be  required  to  show  title.  Of  course  there  may  be 
periphrastic  substitutes,  but  they  do  not  grammatically  take 
its  place. 

To-morrow  will  (not  shall)  be  Friday. 

There  will  be  an  occultation  of  Mars  on  the  20th. 

There  will  be  a  light  crop  of  peaches  this  year. 

The  19th  term  of  the  series  will  be  39. 

The  insurance  will  expire  to-morrow. 

In  these  sentences  will  is  imponderable,  without  color, 
taste,  or  smell  to  offend  even  a  morbid  sensibility.  It  is 
precisely  equal  to  -bo  in  the  Latin,  ama-bo,  or  -ai  in  the 
French  ainier-ai. 

II.  Shall  is  a  word  of  authority  and  command.  It  ex- 
presses no  sense  of  duty.  Thou  shall  and  thou  shall  not 
are  the  language  of  law-givers  and  commanders.  Shall  is 
found  231  times  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
and  Amendments,  and  will  only  three  times,  and  then  is 
used  indirectly. 

III.  Shall  is  properly  used  only  by  the  power  that  can 
enforce  it.  I  have  no  right  to  say  that  a  felon  shall  be 
hanged.  I  may  have  a  conviction  that  he  ought  to  be,  or  a 
belief  that  he  will  be,  but  it  is  for  the  court  to  say  that  he 
shall. 

IV.  Hence  shall  is  a  harsh  word,  and  at  best  requires  a 
deal  of  sweetening.  So,  instead  of  saying  "  You  shall," 
persons  in  authority  are  now  much  in  the  habit  of  saying 
"  You  will  please,''  do  such  a  thing,  as  if  venturing  a  pre- 
diction that  you  will  be  pleased  to  do  it  of  your  own  free 
will  and  accord.  But  words,  however  chosen,  soon  come  to 
mean  just  what  they  are  used  for,  and  the  "  will  please  "  is 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  391 

but  the  glove  that  thinly  covers,  without  concealing,  the 
hand  of  power.  Let  us  not  be  churlish,  however,  but  thank- 
ful that  princes  and  potentates  are  willing  to  take  pains  to 
make  the  exercise  of  their  authority  as  little  offensive  as 
possible ;  but  for  ourselves,  let  us  never  utter  the  word 
shall  when  we  can  find  a  better. 

V.  You  shall !  Bearing  in  mind  that  shall  belongs  only 
to  him  who  can  and  will  enforce  it,  if  I  say:  "You  shall 
stay  home,"  that  is  equivalent  to  saying:  "I  will  exercise 
sufficient  power  and  care  to  make  you  stay."  Although  we 
sometimes  meet  at  the  present  time  with  the  expression, 
"  You  shall,''  it  seems  to  be  only  an  affected  imitation  of 
past  ages ;  and  perhaps  no  one  will  seriously  justify  it  as 
the  proper  language  of  the  nineteenth  century,  except 
where  one  intends  compulsion  or  grants  a  request.  If  one 
asks  me  for  the  loan  of  my  boat,  he  is  not  offended  at  my 
saying  "  You  shall  have  it " — that  is,  "  I  will  take  all  needful 
means  to  see  that  you  get  it." 

VI.  What  is  the  difference,  if  any,  between  "  I  wiir'  and 
"I  shair'  ?  Assigning  to  will  its  lowest  power,  that  of 
mere  futurity,  nothing  can  be  more  natural  than  to  say  "  I 
will"  I  have  a  better  opportunity  of  foreseeing  my  own 
actions  than  those  of  any  one  else ;  and  if  desire,  determina- 
tion, or  consent  be  included,  I  alone  have  immediate  knowl- 
edge. Hence  "  I  will''  is  held  to  be  more  explicit  than  "  I 
shall"  and  generally  to  contain  a  tinge  of  volition.  But, 
what  is  "  I  shall"  ?  Remembering  that  shall  expresses  com- 
pulsion emanating  from  the  speaker,  if  the  natural  sense  of 
the  words  be  regarded,  they  mean,  "  I  will  compel  myself." 
But  it  is  only  the  unwilling  who  need  compulsion ;  and  if 
unwilling,  whence  comes  the  motive  power  to  compel  ?  The 
expression,  like  several  others,  is  an  absurdity.  But  in 
habitual  phrases  the  meaning  of  words  is  little  thought  of ; 
and  there  is  a  general  impression  that  "  I  shall "  is  less  ex- 
plicit and  self-asserting — hence  more  modest — than  "  I  will" 
The  distinction  is  not  one  of  grammar  but  of  politeness. 
Otherwise  there  is  no  difference  in  effect  between  them.  The 
old  maxim  that  will  promises  and  shall  only  predicts  is  good 


392  English  Grammar. 

neither  in  law  nor  morals,  and  would  avail  one  little  who 
should  seek  its  cover  to  evade  an  engagement.  As  has  been 
already  noticed,  there  seems  to  be  a  tendency  to  return  to 
the  more  frank  and  direct  phrase,  "  I  will";  and  perhaps 
persons  now  young  may  live  to  see  it  for  the  third  time  the 
prevailing  expression. 

VII.  In  any  assertion  or  command  the  authority  is  the 
speaker;  but  in  questions  the  person  addressed  is  the  au- 
thority appealed  to.  It  is  for  him  to  answer  whether  a 
thing  is,  or  will,  or  shall  be.  If  I  ask  "  Shall  /"  or  "  Shall 
he  do  this  work?"  it  is  in  effect  asking  whether  you  will 
compel  or  require  one  or  other  of  us  to  do  it.  So  far  is  clear ; 
but  if  I  say  "  Shall  you  do  this  work  ?  "  then  I  ask  whether 
you  will  compel  yourself  to  do  it,  and  reach  the  same  absur- 
dity as  in  ^^  I  shall,''  but  without  even  the  excuse  of  politeness. 
As  shall  subordinates  the  person  to  whom  it  is  applied,  in 
saying  *^  I  shall''  I  affect  an  appearance  of  belittling  myself, 
but  "  Shall  you  ?  "  if  it  has  any  meaning,  belittles  you.  It  is 
to  my  ear  one  of  the  most  harsh  and  unpleasant  expressions 
consistent  with  the  Decalogue.  What  are  we  to  say  then  ? 
Say  almost  anything  else — "  Will  you?"  Do  you  intend?  ex- 
pect ?  or  a  dozen  other  things.  Especially  you  can  say : 
"  Are  you  going  to  do  this  ?  "  The  phrase,  like  many  others, 
is  indeed  a  French  one  ;  but  it  was  domiciled  in  the  language 
before  the  discovery  of  America,  and  so  has  had  time 
to  become  what  is  called  naturalized,  and  is  the  prevailing 
expression  of  plain,  honest  folks.  It  is  doubtful  if  any  one 
ever  says  "  Shall  you  ?  "  without  a  consciousness  of  putting 
on  an  extra  touch  of  style.  Still  "  Shall  you  ?  "  has  been 
used  occasionally  for  at  least  sixty  years  by  writers  other- 
wise respectable.  Some  excuse  may  be  found  in  the  circum- 
stance that  "  Will  you  ?  "  is  a  common  form  of  request  or 
appeal.  If  I  say  "  Will  you  go  to  the  meeting  to-night," 
I  shall  be  generally  understood  to  ask  it  as  a  favor,  or  urge 
it  as  a  duty.  Such  an  objection  does  not  always  apply,  as 
there  are  many  cases  where  it  is  evident  that  no  request  or 
appeal  is  intended.  The  proper  idiomatic  expression,  how- 
ever, is :  "  Are  you  going  to  the  meeting  to-night  ?  " 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  393 

VIII.  Will  is  used  in  stating  the  condition  on  which 
something  desirable  is  to  be  attained  ;  shall  is  used  where 
the  result  is  indifferent  or  undesirable.  The  form  of  the 
result  is  governed  by  the  principles  applicable  to  the  simple 
future. 

"  If  this  will  serve  your  purpose,  you  are  welcome  to  it." 
"  If  he  will  accept  these  terms  that  will  end  all  difficulty." 
"  If  he  shall  persist  in  his  opposition,  the  case  will  be  hope- 
less." 

"  Whoever  shall  now  compare  the  country  round  Rome  with 
the  country  round  Edinburgh,  will  be  able  to  form  some  judg- 
ment," etc.  Macaulay  :  "  Hist,  of  Eng.,"  chap.  i. 

The  distinction  is  not  a  constant  one,  but  is  better  pre- 
served between  would  and  should. 

IX.  In  stating  conditions,  shall  is  often  used  unneces- 
sarily, because,  as  will  be  seen  hereafter,  the  present  tense 
may  be  extensively  used  as  a  future. 

"  When  the  city  shall  attain  (or  shall  have  attained)  a  popula- 
tion of  100,000,  new  sources  of  supply  will  be  required." 

It  would  serve  every  useful  purpose  to  say  :  "  When  the 
city  attains^'  etc. 

"When  I  find  evidences  of  a  deposit  of  copper." 

This  fragment  of  an  incomplete  sentence  may  be  either 

present  or  future,  and    may  be   finished  in  either   of   two 

ways : 

"  I  always  make  a  note  of  it," 

or, 

"  I  will  let  you  know." 

These  endings  determine  the  time,  and  leave  no  uncertainty. 
So  a  great  many  expressions  would  be  improved  by  shorten- 
ing, thus : 

Whoever  shall  find  Whoever  finds 

Although  he  shall  take  every  precaution      Although  he  take 
If  it  shall  rain  before  night  If  it  rain 


394  English  Grammar. 

This  excessive  use  of  shall  belongs  to  a  harsh,  stiff,  ungrace- 
ful style. 

X.  We  foresee,  expect,  hope,  fear,  believe,  think,  that  a 
thing  will  be  ;  demand,  order,  require,  provide,  that  it  shall 
be.  Thus  thought,  perception,  feeling,  is  followed  by  will ; 
the  intentional  exercise  of  power  or  authority  over  another, 
by  shall.  The  distinction  is  sometimes  very  fine,  if  not 
invisible. 

"  In  the  cathedral  glass  the  surface  is  rendered  wavy  and  un- 
even, so  that  the  transmission  of  light  shall  be  correspondingly 
irregular." 

Shall  shows  the  intention  in  making  the  surface  wavy  and 
uneven. 

"  it  is  possible,  without  a  single  arbitrary  conjecture,  to  con- 
struct a  continuous  narrative  which  shall  simply  follow  the 
indications  of  our  authorities  without  doing  violence  to  them  in 
any  instance." — "  Encycl.  Brit.,"  xiii.,  663. 

XL  Poets,  following  the  examples  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
use  shall  where  it  would  not  be  admissible  in  prose : 

"  But  ne'er  shall  Hassan's  Age  repose 
Along  the  brink  at  twilight's  close  ; 
And  here  no  more  shall  human  voice 
Be  heard  to  rage,  regret,  rejoice. 
******* 
To-morrow's  night  shall  be  more  dark." 

Byron  :   "  The  Giaour." 

XII.  There  is  a  curious  use  of  will  which  may  be  con- 
sidered provincial.  It  does  not  point  to  the  future,  but 
indicates  a  cautious  conjecture.  It  used  to  be  common 
in  Scotland  :  "  Ye  '11  be  frae  E'nbro  I  reckon."  That  is  : 
"  I  venture  to  guess  that  you  are  from  Edinburgh."  It  is 
very  common  in  Spanish,  and  is  sometimes,  but  not  often, 
met  with  in  English  literature. 

"  Hence  there  is  much  plausibility  in  the  view  that  the  first 
speech-signs  will  have  been  of  this  phonetic  form." — "  Encycl. 
Brit.,"  xviii.,  770. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  395 

XIII.  Would  and  should  do  not  always  follow  closely 
will  and  shall,  either  as  past  tenses  or  subjunctives.  They 
retain  more  of  the  values  of  five  hundred  years  ago.  Some 
sentences  consist  of  two  parts — a  condition  stated,  and  some- 
thing following  naturally  as  a  consequence :  "  If  ye  love 
me,  keep  my  commandments."  The  first  part  is  often 
called  the  protasis ;  and  the  second  the  apodosis.  These 
terms  are  more  strictly  applicable  when  the  condition  is 
a  mere  supposition,  not  assumed  to  be  true.  Then  would 
and  should,  in  the  apodosis,  preserve  the  distinction  observed 
between  will  and  shall  when  these  latter  form  future  tenses. 
I  should  (or  would),  you  would,  he  would. 

If  the  sky  were  to  fall  I  should  (or  would),  you  would,  he  would 
have  a  chance  to  catch  larks. 

XIV.  But  in  the  protasis,  would  is  used  when  the  con- 
dition is  a  thing  desired  or  requested  ;  should,  when  it  is  a 
mere  supposition  of  something  undesirable  or  indifferent. 

If  you  would  give  me  a  little  help  and  encouragment,  I  think 
I  should  succeed. 

If  it  would  rain  gently  all  night,  it  would  revive  the  crops 
greatly. 

If  the  wind  would  only  moderate  a  little,  etc. 

If  this  rumor  should  prove  to  be  true,  you  would  lose  heavily. 

If  you  should  see  Mr.  S.  you  might  ask  him  when  he  is  to  sail. 

XV.  Should  no  longer  serves  as  the  past  tense  of  shall, 
but  would  is  still  an  expression  of  past  time.  It  is  rather 
old,  and  not  very  common,  but  may  be  used  of  actions  that 
were  repeated  from  time  to  time  as  a  habit.  "  He  would  sit 
silent  for  hours  " — that  is,  he  often  sat  so. 

"  His  listless  length  at  noontide  would  he  stretch 
And  pore  upon  the  brook  that  babbles  by. 

"  Hard  by  yon  wood,  now  smiling  as  in  scorn, 
Mutt'ring  his  wayward  fancies,  he  would  xo\t" 

Gray's  "Elegy." 


396  English  Grammar. 

In  times  when  shall  was  everywhere,  it  was  employed  in 
this  way: 

"  And  therewithalle  his  body  sholde  sterte, 
And  with  the  sterte  alle  sodeynhche  awake, 
And  swiche  a  tremour  fele  aboute  his  hearte, 
That  of  the  fere  his  body  sholden  quake  : 
And  therewithal  he  sholde  a  noyse  make." 

Chaucer  :    "  Troylus  and  Creseyde." 

Would  followed  by  not  is  also  sometimes  a  past  tense,  and 
expresses  strongly  an  action  of  the  will. 

A  pressing  invitation  was  sent  to  him,  but  he  would  not  come. 

Otherwise  than  here  shown  would  and  should  do  not  indi- 
cate past  time.  In  applying  them  to  the  past  we  have  to 
say  would  have  and  should  have. 

XVI.  Should  occurs  as  the  equivalent  of  ought,  retaining 
the  old  sense  of  duty  or  obligation. 

He  should  send  the  boy  to  school. 

Here  it  is  not  a  past  tense,  nor  a  subjunctive.  It  may  be 
regarded  as  a  secondary  growth  from  shall,  just  as  ought, 
originally  a  past  tense  of  owe,  has  become  practically  a  new 
verb.  This  is  the  only  sense  in  which  should  has  any  defi- 
nite meaning.  In  other  cases  it  only  increases  the  doubt 
and  uncertainty  of  a  supposition. 

XVII.  The  lines  that  separate  Shall  from  May,  Will, 
Can,  and  Ought  are  devious  and  indistinct.  Suppose  a  per- 
son were  to  say  "  I  shall  come  to-morrow,"  and  I  am  to 
give,  not  the  precise  words  but  the  substance  of  that  prom- 
ise, grammarians  would  be  pretty  well  agreed  that  I  ought 
to  say  "  He  said  that  he  should  come  to-morrow," — not 
that  he  would.  It  would  follow  consistently,  and  would  per- 
haps be  conceded,  that  if  the  first  speaker  had  said  "  will"  I 
might  say  would.  But  suppose,  further,  that  I  remember 
only  the  substance  of  the  promise,  and  not  the  precise  words, 
ought  I  then  to  use  should  or  would?     Or  if  a  third  person 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  397 

were  to  ask  me  the  character  of  the  reply,  which  would  be 
the  most  proper  for  him  to  say?  "  Did  he  say  he  should 
come  ?  "  or  *'  Did  he  say  he  would  come  ?  "  I  am  of  opinion 
that  in  thus  giving  the  purport  of  anything  said  or  written, 
we  are  not  bound  to  preserve  the  identity  of  a  single  word. 
There  are  places  where  eggs  are  sold  by  the  hundred — else- 
where generally  by  the  dozen.  Now,  if  a  poulterer  should 
come  to  the  door  and  offer  to  sell  "  half  a  hundred  "  eggs,  I 
think  the  servant  who  interviewed  him  would  be  sustained 
in  a  court  of  justice,  and  in  the  court  of  conscience,  in  re- 
porting the  number  either  as  "  fifty  "  or  as  "  four  dozen  and 
two."  So  I  think  I  ought  not  to  be  censured  for  taking  my 
own  way  and  saying  **  would." 

The  following  selected  sentences  will  illustrate  further  the 
obscure  limbo  that  surrounds  Shall.  In  each  instance  I 
place  in  parentheses  the  auxiliary  that  is  nearly  or  quite 
equivalent : 

"  Considering  the  thing  to  be  accomplished,  it  will  seem  likely 
that  the  men  intended  successfully  to  resist  the  influence  of  such 
a  system  should  be  endowed  with  little  natural  sense  of  beauty, 
and  thus  rendered  dead  to  the  temptation  it  presented." 

RusKiN  :     "  Pre-Raphaelitism." 

The  meaning  is  doubtful ;  would  or  ought  would  be  intel- 
ligible. 

"the  necessity  of  joining  expressions  of  the  most  exemplary 
humility  *  *  *  with  such  assertions  of  Divine  authority  as 
should  {ox  would  ^  secure  acceptance  for  the  epistle  itself  in  the 
sacred  canon."  Ruskin  :  "  Sheepfolds." 

"  it  may  by  and  by  give  the  world  an  encyclopaedic  dictionary 
of  literature,  in  which  the  chief  of  our  standard  authors  shall  (or 
will^  be  thoroughly  treated." — New  York  Ev.  Post,  June  5, 
1889. 

"  But  what  should  {can)  this  mean." 

Wycherly's  "  Country  Girl." 

"  But  how  should  {would  or  could)  you  know  him  ? " 

Ben  Jonson  :    "Every  Man  in  His  Humour." 


39^  .         English  Grammar. 

"  What  should  {could)  Boston  have  known  about  the  Parsonage 
where  the  morals  of  Harvard  youth  were  depleted  along  with 
Harvard  purses  ;  where  wine  ran  freely  from  dusk  till  daybreak  ? 
*  *  *  What  should  {could)  Boston  have  known  about  it,  even 
though  an  Alderman  had  owned  this  palace  of  joy.  *  *  *  ? " — 
North  Am.  Review,  Nov.,  1888. 

"  the  hospital  fund  is  to  be  expended  for  the  benefit  of  both  in 
such  proportion  as  the  post-surgeon  shall  (or  may)  deem  just." 
"Decision  of  Secretary  of  War,"  Apr.  29,  1889. 

"  His  position  should  (or  ought  to)  be  raised  to  the  dignity  of  a 
profession." — North  Am.  Review,  March,  1889,  p.  325. 

XVIII.  The  following  examples  illustrate  what  I  deem 
the  misuse  of  shall  and  should. 

"  Any  one  who  will  consider  the  structure  of  the  following  sen- 
tences shall  perceive  this  pictorial  power  of  the  Participle." 

Prof.  Earle  :   "  English  Prose." 

"  A  child  learning  to  read  and  coming  to  the  word  inveigle 
shall  be  told  to  call  it  inveegle,  though  the  best  usage  at  present 
is  to  say  invaygle." 

Earle's  "Philology  of  the  English  Tongue,"  184. 

"  one  may  expect  a  well  bred  person  should  soon  take  the 
hint."  Fielding  :  "  Joseph  Andrews." 

"  He  was,  indeed,  one  of  the  largest  men  you  should  see." — Id. 

"  I  had  a  sexton  once,  when  I  was  a  clerk,  that  should  have 
dug  three  graves  while  he  was  digging  one." 

Fielding  :  "Tom  Jones." 

"  Shall  you  run  away  to-day  ?  " 

George  Eliot  :  **  Mill  on  the  Floss." 

"  Should  you  be  influenced  by  any  feeling  in  regard  to  (i)  sit- 
ting down  thirteen  at  a  table  ;  (2)  beginning  a  voyage  on  Friday," 
etc. — "  Circular  Inquiry  by  an  American  Society." 

"  I  abated  my  pace,  and  looked  about  me  for  some  side  aisle 
that  should  admit  me  into  the  innermost  sanctuary  of  this  green 
cathedral." — Hawthorne. 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  399 

"  If  we  could  look  into  the  hearts  where  we  wish  to  be  most 
valued,  what  should  you  expect  to  see  ?  " — Id. 

Observe  here  the  Hibemianism  of  inquiring  what  you 
should  see  if  we  could  look. 

"  Now  as  she  had  been  mentioned  by  Mark  several  times 
within  a  few  preceding  pages,  it  is  not  likely  that  this  mode  of 
designating  her    *     *     *     should  have  been  used  by  him. 

Norton's  "  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,"  Ixxvii. 

"  It  should  seem." 

This  is  an  absurd  expression  often  met  with  even  in  the 
most  esteemed  authors.  What  does  it  mean?  We  all  un- 
derstand the  word  seem  in  its  two  shades  of  meaning, 
appearing  and  presenting  a  false  appearance.  Now  a  thing 
either  appears  or  does  not  appear  ;  and  that  might  well  be 
an  end  of  the  matter.  But  in  our  great  fondness  for  a  dis- 
play of  modesty  we  sometimes  say,  hesitatingly  :  "  It  would 
seem."  This  might  consistently  enough  have  a  meaning, 
which  would  be :  "  Granting  certain  conditions,  it  would 
then  seem."  But  that  is  not  what  people  mean  by  the 
phrase,  but  something  like  this  :  "  I  beg  pardon  ten  thou- 
sand times  for  venturing  to  intimate  that  possibly  it  seems." 
Still,  what  is  meant  by,  "  It  should  seem,"  and  wherein 
does  it  differ  from  "  It  would  seem  "  ?  According  to  the 
proper  signification  of  the  words  the  meaning  should  be : 
"  It  ought  to  seem,  but  does  not."  Beyond  that  I  am  una- 
ble to  extract  from  it  any  semblance  of  sense. 

The  expressions  animadverted  upon  in  this  section  are 
those  of  literary  men  and  their  ambitious  imitators.  They 
reflect  the  stiff  formalism  of  past  ages,  and  not  the  thought 
and  speech  oi  the  active  progressive  part  of  mankind.  Con- 
sidering the  extreme  difficulty  of  maintaining  so  many 
wavering  lines  of  distinction,  and  the  utter  folly  of  saying, 
for  example,  "  I  shall,''  and  "  You  will"  I  cannot  but  think 
that  the  language  would  be  improved  by  using  will  exclu- 
sively to  express  futurity,  and  shall  as  the  expression  of 
authority.     In  closing  this  lengthy  discussion  of  will  and 


400  English  Grammar. 

shall,  I  cite  one  more  example  to  show,  the  futility  of  the 
distinctions  now  recognized. 

"He  is  anxious  to  have  a  cistern  built  that  shall  hold  loo 
hogsheads." 

Would  not  every  one  be  just  as  well  off  if  it  were  permis- 
sible to  say,  "  will  hold  "  ?  For  my  part  I  welcome  as  a 
normal  and  healthy  advance  the  increasing  use  of  will,  of 
which  grammarians  generally  complain. 

CAN. 

The  present  tense  of  this  verb  was  in  Gothic  :  ik  kann, 
thu  kant,  is  kann,  weis  kunnuni,  jus  kunnuth,  eis  kunnun. 

Past  tense  :  ik  kuntha,  tim  kunthes,  is  kuntha,  wcis  kunthe- 
dum,  Jus  kuntheduth,  eis  kunthedun. 

Anglo-Saxon,  present  tense  :  ic  can,  thu  canst,  he  can,  we 
cunnon,  ge  cunnon,  heo  cunnon. 

Past  tense :  ic  cu-the,  thu  cu-thest,  he  cu-the,  we  cu-thon, 
ge  cu-thon,  Jteo  cu-tfion. 

Observe  that  in  Anglo-Saxon,  as  in  the  English  of  all 
periods,  the  letter  n  has  been  dropped  from  the  past  tense, 
although  preserved  in  all  the  other  Teutonic  languages.  To 
compensate  for  the  loss  of  the  n  the  vowel  was  lengthened, 
and  at  last  became  the  ou  in  could,  the  /  of  which  is  a  mere 
blunder,  from  a  supposed  analogy  with  would  and  should. 
This  innovation  dates  from  about  the  year  1450,  although 
couthe,  couth,  and  kude  occur  much  later. 

The  earliest  signification  was,  to  know.  During  the  period 
of  transition  it  was  used  indifferently  to  express  knowledge 
and  ability.  Cunning  is  a  derived  verbal  noun  and  verbal 
adjective  ;  and  the  primary  meaning  of  un-couth  was  merely 
unknown,  strange,  like  the  Scotch  un-co.  The  following 
examples  will  illustrate  the  early  use  of  the  word,  both  as 
to  form  and  meaning : 

"  Ther-ef  ter  waex  suythe  micel  uuerre  betuyx  the  king  & 
Randolf  eorl  of  Csestre  noht  for-thi  th  he  ne  iaf  him  al  th  he  cuthe 
axen  him,  alse  he  dide  alle  othre." 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  401 

(Thereafter  waxed  very  great  war  betwixt  the  king  and  Ran- 
dolph earl  of  Chester,  not  because  that  he  gave  him  not  all  that 
he  could  z^  of  him,  as  he  did  to  all  others.) 

"  Saxon  Chronicle,"  a.d.  1150. 

"  Ne  was  non  so  wis  man  in  al  his  lond. 
The  kude  vn-don  this  dremes  bond," 

Genesis  and  Exodus,  1250. 

"  And  every  statute  couthe  he  pleyn  by  roote." 

Chaucer  :  "  Prologue  to  Canterbury  Tales." 

"  And  thogh  it  happen  sum  of  hem  be  fortune,  to  gon  out,  thei 
conen  no  maner  of  langage  but  Ebrew." 

Sir  John  Mandeville. 

"  And  the  wondriden,  seyinge  Hou  kan  this  man  lettris,  sithen 
he  hath  not  lernyd  ? " 

Wycliffe  :  John  vii.,  15. 

"  Ye  !  blessed  be  alway  a  lewd  man 
That  not  but  only  his  bileeve  can." 

(That  is  an  unlearned  man  who  knows  only  the  creed.) 

Chaucer  :  "  The  Miller's  Tale." 

"  For  y  can  nou3t  my  crede  y  kare  wel  harde  ; 
For  y  can  fynden  no  man  that  fully  beleveth." 

"  The  Ploughman's  Crede." 

MUST. 

There  was  an  old  verb,  mote,  becoming  obsolete  even  in 

Saxon  times,  for  the  infinitive  is  not  found.     The  meaning 

was,  to  be  able  or  at  liberty  to  do  a  thing,  hence  closely 

related  in  signification  to  can  and  may.     It  was  much  used 

as  a  word  of  wishing  or  assent,  like  the  Hebrew  Amen — "  So 

mote  it  be  !  "     To  this  was  added  a  sense  of  obligation,  as  of 

something  that  ought  to  be — indeed,  must  be.     The  past 

tense  was  moste,  becoming  the  modern  must.     This  is  one 

of  three  surviving  words — the  others  being  durst  and  wist — 

that  insert  s  in  forming  the  past  tense.      This  past  tense, 

must,  becomes  a  secondary  or  derivative  verb  with  a  present 

signification.     It  admits  of  no  change  of  form.     The  ending 
36 


402  English  Grammar. 

in  st  precludes  the  additional  st  of  the  second  person  singu- 
lar. Must  usually  expresses  a  general,  undefined  necessity 
or  propriety,  not,  like  shall,  the  authority  of  a  superior. 

"  Here  coraeth  my  mortal  enemy, 
Withoute  faile  he  mot  be  deed  or  I  ; 
For  eyther  I  mot  slen  him  at  the  gappe, 
Or  he  mot  slee  me." 

Chaucer  :  "  Knight's  Tale." 

"  For.    Do  you  confesse  the  bond  ? 

"  Ant.     I  do. 

"  For.    Then  must  the  Jew  be  merciful. 

"  J^ew.  On  what  compulsion  must  I  ?     Tell  me  that." 

"  Merchant  of  Venice." 

The  question  was  too  hard  even  for  the  subtlety  of  Portia. 

Must  is  also  used  where  the  necessity  is  not  of  doing 
anything,  but  of  believing  something  on  the  evidence  of 
circumstances. 

"  allowing  the  supposed  change  to  have  been  possible,  it  must 
have  met  with  great  opposition  ;  it  must  have  provoked  much 
discussion  ;  it  must  have  been  the  result  of  much  deliberation  ; 
there  must  have  been  a  great  deal  written  about  it  at  the  time  ;  it 
must  have  been  often  referred  to  afterwards." 

Norton  :  "  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels." 

LET. 

From  a  Teutonic  root  lat,  meaning  to  let  alone,  leave 
undisturbed,  is  derived  the  adjective  late,  in  the  sense  of  late 
gleanings,  late  education.  As  a  verb  the  word  took  two 
forms — I,  a  primary  strong  verb,  A.-S.  Icetan,  to  allow,  per- 
mit, let  anything  go  or  do  as  it  will ;  2,  a  secondary  weak 
verb,  lettan,  to  make  late,  delay,  hinder.  Both  verbs  came 
to  have  the  same  form  in  English.  The  second  is  now 
obsolescent.  An  example  of  its  former  use  is  afforded  by 
Spenser,  "  Faerie  Queene,"  iii.,  5. 

"  And  all  the  while  their  malice  they  did  whet, 
With  cruell  threats  his  passage  through  the  ford  to  let**     \ 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  403 

So  too, 

"  he  who  now  letteth  will  let  until  he  be  taken  out  of  the  way." 

2  Thess.  ii.,  7. 

The  other  verb  has  had  and  still  has  a  very  extended  use. 
From  the  idea  of  letting  anything  have  its  own  way  came 
naturally  such  expressions  as  to  let  go,  let  loose,  let  out ;  and, 
as  most  things  left  to  themselves  sink  or  fall  to  the  ground, 
we  have  to  let  down.  The  word  was  also  quite  commonly 
used  in  the  sense  of  to  cause : 

"  Anon  he  let  two  cofres  make. 
Of  o  semblance  and  of  o  make." 

GOWER. 

Naturally  enough  let  came  to  be  used  before  any  kind  of 
a  verb  expressing  the  action  of  the  speaker  or  of  a  third  per- 
son. Let — that  is,  permit — me  or  him  to  do  this  or  that. 
Our  language,  like  many  others,  was  always  deficient  in  a 
separate  form  for  directing  a  command  or  wish  to  any  other 
than  the  person  spoken  to  ;  so  let  with  an  infinitive  of  the 
principal  verb  came  to  supply  the  place  of  an  imperative  of 
the  first  and  third  persons.  This  is  usually  thought  to  be 
rather  modern,  but  it  is  as  old  as  the  "  Ormulum,"  if  not 
older.    Indeed,  it  follows  unavoidably  from  the  Anglo-Saxon. 

"  Fylig  me  and  lest  deade  bebyrigean  hyra  deadan." 
(Follow  me,  and  let  the  dead  bury  their  dead.) 

Although  the  form  is  that  of  a  request  for  permission, 
there  is  often  no  trace  of  such  a  meaning  left,  and  let  is 
purely  formal,  with  no  distinctive  signification.  In  the  sub- 
lime words — "  Let  there  be  light"  and  "  Let  us  make  man  in 
our  imaged' — there  is  no  request  for  permission.  Occasion- 
ally in  poetry  and  poetic  prose  we  meet  with  a  more  primitive 
and  forcible  form  of  expression  without  let. 

"  Be  thine  the  glory  and  be  mine  the  shame." 

"  Succeed  the  verse  or  fail." — Keats. 

"  All  eyes  be  muffled."— /</. 

"  and  now  be  the  welkin  split  with  vivats." 

Carlyle. 


404  English  Grammar. 

OUGHT. 

The  Gothic  aigan,  to  possess,  had  an  old  past  tense  aik 
used  as  a  present ;  and  in  Hke  manner  the  past  tense,  dh,  of 
the  A.-S.  dgan,  to  possess,  was  used  as  a  present.  From  this 
a  secondary  past  tense,  dhte,  was  formed.  As  d  became  o  in 
English,  and  h  at  the  end  of  a  syllable  was  regularly  replaced 
by  gh,  the  Middle  English  oughte — two  syllables — is  ac- 
counted for  as  the  past  tense  of  owen,  to  possess.  This  in 
turn  was  transformed  into  the  modern  ought.  Out  of  the 
frequent  possession  of  things  not  paid  for  grew  the  meaning 
of  owing  for,  and  from  that  again  the  general  sense  of  obli- 
gation.    This  sense  was  early  attached  to  the  word. 

'*  we  aZen  thene  sunnedei  switheliche  wel  to  wurthien." 
(We  owe  to  honor  the  Sunday  exceedingly  well.) 

"Old  English  Homilies,"  a.d.  1200. 

"  all  Chrestene  men  alen  to  dai  to  noten." 
(All  Christian  men  owe  to  enjoy  this  day.) — Id. 

"  3e  ancren  owen  this  lutle  laste  stucchen  reden  to  our  wum- 
men  euriche  wike  enes." 

(You  nuns  owe  to  read  this  last  little  piece  to  your  women  once 
every  week.)  "Ancren  Riwle,"  a.d.  1220. 

"  That  forgotten  was  no  thing 
That  owe  to  be  done." 

Chaucer's  "  Dream." 

At  the  same  time  ought  was  employed  as  a  past  tense  Avith 
the  modern  sense  of  owed. 

"  Tweye  dettours  were  to  sum  leenere  ;  con  ouZhte  fyue  hun- 
dred pens,  and  an  other  fyfty." 

Wycliffe  :  Trans.  Luke  vii.,  41. 
"  There  was  a  certayne  lender  which  had  two  detters  ;  the  one 
ought  five  hundred  pence,  and  the  other  fifty." 

Tyndale's  version. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  confusion  between  the  present 
and  past  tenses,  which  resulted  in  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
past  to  express  duty  or  obligation. 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  405 

"  As  every  Servaunt  owyth  to  have  his  Sustenaunce  of  hym  that 
he  servyth,  so  owght  the  Pope  to  be  susteyned  by  the  Chirche." 
Sir  John  Fortescue  :  "  Monarchie,"  Chap.  vii. 
Of  cursing  oweth  ech  gulty  man  to  drede." 

Chaucer  ;  "  Prologue  to  C.  T." 
"  And  also  rich  in  every  thought 
As  he  that  all  hath  and  ought  nought." 

Chaucer's  "  Dream,"  107 1. 

Ought  may  be  regarded  now  as  a  secondary  grov^rth — 
present  in  tense.     The  past  is  "  ought  to  have." 

The  principal  verb  that  follows  ought  is  always  preceded 
by  to.  "  We  ought  to  obey  the  laws."  In  this  respect  ought 
stands  alone. 

DO. 

The  earliest  form  in  which  we  know  this  word  is  the  San- 
skrit dha,  to  set,  put,  or  place,  a  meaning  preserved  in  its 
various  migrations  down  to  don  and  doff,  to  put  on  and  to 
put  off,  and  the  now  obsolete  dup  and  dout.  This  verb  has 
a  persistent  habit  of  being  doubled,  and  its  past  tense,  did, 
is  the  only  familiar  instance  of  reduplication  left  in  our  lan- 
guage. But  in  Sanskrit  and  Greek  even  the  present  tense 
underwent  reduplication — dd-dha-mi  and  ri-^Tj-jxt.  The  mi 
is  the  same  word  as  our  pronoun  me.  In  Latin  the  redupli- 
cation was  limited  to  the  perfect  tenses — con-didi,  I  put 
together,  built.  Here  did-i  is  grammatically  equivalent  to 
English,  /  did. 

Do  is  not  exclusively  an  auxiliary,  as  people  do  harvest 
work,  housework,  plain  sewing,  etc.  As  an  auxiliary  its  use 
is  now  very  extensive,  and  may  seem  to  be  quite  modern, 
but  it  is  as  old  as  King  Alfred.  First,  it  adds  emphasis  to 
the  main  verb,  and  that  is  quite  old.  Jesus  said  to  the 
accused  woman,  John  viii.,  11  : 

"  do  ga,  and  ne  synga  thu  naefre  ma." 
{Do  go,  and  sin  thou  not  never  more.) 

If  one  were  accused  of  never  reading  anything,  he  might 
answer  with  some  warmth  :  "  Yes,  I  do  read." 


4o6  English  Grammar. 

Second,  it  is  used  in  asking  questions.  Macbeth  inquires 
of  Banquo  :  "  Ride  you  this  afternoone  ?  "  The  nearest 
approach  our  modern  speech  could  make — "  Do  you  ride 
this  afternoon  ?  "  is  much  inferior  in  terseness.  Yet  I  fear 
the  modern  pedant  would  say,  "  Shall  you  ride,"  an  expres- 
sion that  wrings  the  nerves  like  biting  a  gravel  stone  in  a 
pudding. 

Third.  Do  is  used  with  negative  sentences. 

They  did  not  come  according  to  agreement. 

Yet  the  language  was  much  better  without  the  auxiliary  in 
such  cases. 

"  Go  not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and  into  any  city  of  the 
Samaritans  enter  ye  not." 

There  are  two  early  meanings  of  do — to  put  and  to  cause 
— that  are  now  found  only  in  old  books.  In  the  following 
from  the  "Lay  of  Havelok  the  Dane,"  A.D.  13CX),  do  and 
the  last  dede  =  put,  place  ;  otherwise  dede  is  merely  em- 
phatic. 

"  Ther-inne  wanted  nouct  a  nayl. 
That  euere  he  sholde  ther-inne  do." 

"  And  in  the  castel  dede  him  do, 
Ther  non  ne  micte  him  comen  to." 

"  Grim  dede  maken  a  ful  fayr  bed, 
Unclothed  him  and  dede  him  ther-inne." 

We  still  speak  of  doing  up  and  doing  away  things. 

*'  What  helpeth  that  to  don  my  blame  away  ?  " 

Chaucer  :  "  Troylus  and  Creseide." 

In  the  three  following  examples,  do  means  to  cause : 

'*  Unk  schal  i-tide  harm  and  schonde, 
I         3ef  5e  doth  grith-bruche  on  his  londe." 
(Harm  and  shame  shall  betide  you  two. 
If  ye  cause  peace-breaking  in  his  land.) 

"  Owl  and  Nightingale,"  1250. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  407 

"  Now  goo  thou,  syr  Lucan,  sayd  the  king,  and  do  me  to  wyte 
what  bytokens  that  noyse  in  the  felde." 

Mallory's  "  Morte  Darthur,"  1469. 

"  Moreover,  brethren,  we  do  you  to  wit  of  the  grace  of  God 
bestowed  on  the  churches  of  Macedonia." — 2  Cor.  viii.,  i. 

There  is  another  word  do,  from  A.-S.  dugan,  to  avail,  be 
worth  or  fit,  found  in  the  expressions,  "  That  will  do,' 
"  That  will  not  do.''  A  relic  of  the  g  survives  in  doughty, 
a  word  that  used  to  mean  strong,  valiant,  but  now  expresses 
rather  more  contempt  than  admiration. 

"  The  gees,  the  hennes  of  the  yerd, 
Al  he  solde  that  ouct  doucte. 
That  he  euere  selle  moucte." 

"  Havelok." 

It  is  not  certain  which  of  these  two  words  ends  the  com- 
mon greeting,  "  How  do  you  do  ?  " 

DARE. 

Anglo-Saxon,  ic  dear,  thu  dearst,  he  dear ;  past  tense,  ic 
dorst,  etc.  Primarily,  as  we  all  know,  the  word  expressed 
courage,  daring. 

"  The  folke  wel  wene,  that  thou  for  cowardise 
Thee  fainest  sick,  and  that  thou  darst  not  rise." 

Chaucer  :  **  Troylus  and  Creseide." 

But  on  some  undisputed  assertion  we  often  hear  the  re- 
mark, ''  I  dare-say  that  is  so,"  which  requires  no  courage  at 
all.  The  word  has  here  degenerated  into  a  mere  form  of 
expression,  and  has  no  particular  meaning.  But  the  word 
is  not  wholly  an  auxiliary.  It  is  as  it  were  just  beginning 
its  downward  course.  It  has  also  an  active  or  transitive 
meaning — to  defy. 

"  What,  is  Brutus  sicke  ? 
And  will  he  steale  out  of  his  wholesome  bed 
To  dare  the  vile  contagion  of  the  Night  ?  " 

"Julius  Caesar,  ii.,  i. 


4o8  English  Grammar. 

The  word  became  divided,  both  as  to  form  and  significa- 
tion. The  auxiliary  followed  the  old  forms,  and  is  now,  / 
dare,  thou  darest,  he  dare  ;  past  tense,  /  durst,  etc.  For  the 
active  verb  new  forms  were  developed  :  /  dare,  thou  darest, 
he  dares  ;  past  tense,  /  dared,  etc  ;  and  these  always  tend  to 
displace  the  old. 

"  This  Midas  knew,  and  durst  communicate 
To  none  but  to  his  wife,  his  ears  of  state." 

Dryden  :  "  Wife  of  Bath's  Tale." 
"  Camidius,  wee 
"  Will  fight  with  him  by  sea. 
"  Cleo.  By  sea,  what  else  ? 
"  Cam.  Why  will  my  Lord  do  so  ? 
"  Ant.  For  that  he  dares  us  too  *t, 
^''  Enob.  So  hath  my  Lord  dard  him  to  single  fight." 

"  Anthony  and  Cleopatra,"  iii.,  7. 

HAVE. 

This  word  primarily  expresses  possession  ;  and  those  who 
hold  that  words  never  change  assume  the  task  of  showing 
property  or  possession  in  such  an  expression  as  "  I  have 
never  seen  such  grapes  as  you  describe."  What  is  it  that  I 
have  when  I  have  lost  all  ?  The  following  is  probably  as 
good  as  any  answer  that  can  be  given  in  support  of  such 
possession  : 

''^Have,  of  which  had  is  the  preterite  form,  expresses  simply 
present  possession.  *  *  *  Tq  express  what  the  Romans 
expressed  by  amavi,  an  inflection  of  amo,  we  use  a  verb  have  and 
the  perfect  participle  of  another  verb.  The  participle  is  an  ex- 
pression of  completed  action  in  the  abstract — loved.  The  only 
real  verb  that  we  use  in  this  instance  is  one  that  signifies  posses- 
sion. We  say,  I  have — have  what  ?  possess  what  ?  Possession 
implies  an  object  possessed  ;  and  in  this  case  it  is  that  completed 
action  which  is  expressed  in  the  abstract  by  the  participle."* 

The  idea  of  possessing  a  completed  action  in  the  abstract 
is  too  "  abstract  "  for  my  comprehension.     It  is  more  intan- 

'  Richard  Grant  White:  "Words  and  their  Uses,"  p.  306:  "  Every-Day 
English,"?.  434. 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  409 

gible  than  the  "  incorporeal  hereditaments  "  of  the  English 
Law.  Let  us  try  to  illustrate  a  single  example  on  this 
principle : 

"  I  had  forgotten  to  tell  her  that  I  had  eaten  no  dinner," 

This  sentence  then  should  mean  : 

"  I  was  in  possession  of  the  past  completed,  action  in  the  ab- 
stract of  forgetting  (or  forgetting  in  the  abstract),  the  action 
of  telling  that,  at  some  still  earlier  period,  I  was  in  possession  of 
the  past  completed  action  of  eating  no  dinner — in  the  abstract." 

In  trying  to  take  stock  of  these  possessions  I  cannot  quite 
make  out  what  my  property  is,  nor  whether  I  am  thereby 
richer  or  poorer,  even  if  there  be  no  flaw  in  the  title. 

The  reader  who  has  accompanied  me  thus  far  must  be 
already  familiar  with  the  view  that  language  is  not  built  up 
in  the  manner  of  Euclid's  Elements  or  a  treatise  on  Alge- 
bra. He  has  seen  that  it  is  a  congeries  of  surviving  popular 
usages — slowly  developed,  ever  changing  ;  that  its  plains  of 
uniformity  are  everywhere  seamed  and  scarred  with  fissures, 
dykes,  and  all  irregularities.  If  we  but  knew  how  these 
irregularities  arose  we  should  understand  them  ;  but  that 
knowledge  is  hard  of  attainment.  We  may  be  sure  that  "  I 
have  loved "  came  into  use  by  steps  that  seemed  perfectly 
natural,  even  if  we  should  never  discover  them.  We  can 
imagine  such  a  starting-point  as  this : 

"  The  boys  had  roasted  apples  which  they  were  eating." 

Here  Jmd  may  express  possession  ;  but  the  thing  possessed 
is  "  roasted  apples,"  not  the  past  completed  action  of  roast- 
ing in  the  abstract,  for  which  boys  would  care  very  little. 
Then  people  might  have  a  great  many  other  things,  such  as 
"  dressed  skins,"  "  embroidered  robes,"  "  thatched  houses." 
To  the  extent  and  form  of  such  development  there  is  no 
limit,  so  common  it  is  for  the  end  to  lose  all  sight  of  the 
beginning.  Grimm  quotes  a  line  in  point  from  a  hymn  of 
the  fourth  century,  by  St.  Ambrose  : 

"  quae  extinctas  habent  lampadas."  ' 
*  "  Deutsche  Grammatik,"  iv.,  154. 


4IO  English  Grammar. 

together  with  an  Old  High  German  translation  : 

"  deo  arslactu  eigU7i  leohtkar." 

which  may  mean  either 

"  who  have  extinguished  lamps," 
or 

"  who  have  extinguished  their  lamps." 

Indeed,  the  Latin  race  had  this  form  of  expression  time  out 
of  mind,  although  they,  of  all  people,  had  least  need  for  such 
extra  contrivances.  Plautus,  in  the  second  century  B.C., 
wrote : 

"  Vir  me  habet  pessumis  despicatum  modis." 
(The  man  has  slighted  me  in  the  very  worst  way.) 

"  Casina,"  ii.,  2,  15. 
Again  : 

"  docemur     *    *    *    auctoritate  nutuque  legum  domitas  habere 
libidines."  Cic.  :  "  De  Oratore,"  i.,  43. 

"  Clodii  zxivawxra.  perspectum  habeo" 

Cic.  :  "  Epist  ad  Brutum,"  i.,  i. 
"  Omnes  decumas  ad  aquam  deportatas  haberent." 

Cic.  :  in  "  Verrem,"  ii.,  3,  15. 
"  iste   *   *   *   bellum  sacrilegum  semper  impiumque  habiat  in- 
dicium. 

Id.,  ii.,  5,  72. 

The  Teutonic  nations,  whose  verbs  were  lacking  in  distinc- 
tions of  time,  borrowed  this  form  of  expression  from  their 
Latin  neighbors  in  the  sixth  and  eighth  centuries.  Grimm 
gives  several  early  examples  '  :  "  intfangan  eigut " — thou 
hast  received ;  "  haben  gistriunit  " — I  have  gained.  And  now 
such  expressions  as,  "I  have  written,"  "You  have  heard," 
"  He  had  bought  land,"  are  among  the  best  established  in 
the  language  for  expressing  actions  that  are  finished  and  past. 
There  is  another  use  of  have  as  an  auxiliary  that  is  not 
quite  so  common — have  to — as  in :  "  The  bridge  being 
carried  away,  he  had  to  swim  the  river."     Here  have  is  not 

*  "  Deutsche  Grammatik,"  iv.,  150. 


Auxiliary  Verbs,  411 

quite  so  remote  from  the  idea  of  possession — the  possession 
of  a  duty  or  task  to  perform.  This,  too,  is  borrowed  from 
the  Latins,  but  is  post-classic.  Riddle's  Latin  Lexicon  cites 
two  passages  from  Tertullian,  which  I  have  not  the  means 
of  verifying : 

"  etiam  Filius  Dei  mori  habuit." 
"  si  inimicos  jubemur  diligere,  quem  habemus  odissef" 

In  this  last  sentence  the  trenchant  African  Father  was  un- 
consciously repeating  Confucius. 

The  phrase  had  rather  has  been  much  disputed  ;  and  some 
even  contend  that  it  is  sheer  nonsense.  That  it  has  all  the 
sanction  that  can  be  derived  from  respectable  usage  will 
scarcely  be  denied.  On  that  point  I  shall  cite  only  two 
authorities,  but  they  are  of  the  greatest  weight — neither  so 
old  as  to  be  obsolete,  nor  so  new  as  to  be  looked  out  of 
countenance. 

"  I  had  rather  speak  five  words  with  my  understanding,  that  by 
my  voice  I  might  teach  others  also,  than  ten  thousand  words  in 
an  unknown  tongue." — i  Cor.  xiv.,  19. 

"  I  had  rather  believe  all  the  fables  in  the  legend,  and  the 
Talmud  and  the  Alcoran  than  that  this  universal  frame  is  without 
a  mind  ;  and  therefore  God  never  wrought  miracle  to  convince 
atheism,  because  his  ordinary  works  convince  it." 

Bacon  :  Essay  xvi. 

The  phrase  has  the  further  high  merit  of  being  short,  neat, 
and  universally  understood.  Those  who  call  it  nonsense 
forget  for  the  moment,  what  all  know,  that  language  is  full 
of  idioms — expressions  that  will  not  parse,  will  not  fit  them- 
selves to  grammatical  rules — the  rules  being  primarily  Latin. 
Dreary  and  weary  must  the  style  be  that  can  all  be  parsed. 
Idioms  are  short,  forcible,  and  great  favorites  with  people 
who  would  rather  work  or  think  than  talk  ;  and  they  abound 
in  the  best  writers.  Yet  idioms  are  expressions  that  taken 
literally  are  either  absurd,  or,  what  is  worse,  untrue.  "  There 
is  no  water  here,''  "  All  the  lamps  we7it  out."  The  Dutch 
say,  "  Dans  maar  op,"  where  the  English  say,  "  Get  out," 


412  English  Grammar. 

which  means  Depart ;  but  all  three  phrases  taken  literally 
are  nonsensical — "  Dance  more  up,"  "  Procure  out,"  "  From 
part." 

The  Germans  have  a  word,  "  lieb,'*  adj.  and  adv.,  meaning 
dear,  beloved,  gladly,  with  pleasure.  The  comparative  is 
lieber ;  and  it  is  the  same  word  as  the  nearly  obsolete  Eng- 
lish lief,  which  had  also  a  comparative,  liever.  The  Germans, 
like  us,  hold  some  things  dear,  dearer,  or  m.ost  dear.  "  Ich 
habe  meinen  Freund  lieb,  lieber,  am  liebsteny  "  So  habe  ich 
es  am  liebsten  "  /  I  have  it  lievest  so.  "  So  hdtte  ich  es  lieber  ; 
I  had — that  is,  would  have — it  liever  so, — would  prefer  it.  A 
similar  usage  was  quite  common  in  early  English,  in  which 
/  had  is  to  be  construed :  I  would  have,  hold,  esteem  it. 

"  Fare  leuer  he  hadde  wende 
And  bidde  ys  meete." 
(Far  liever  he  had  go 
And  beg  his  meat.) 

Robert  of  Gloucester,  a.d.  1298. 

"  And  saide  they  hadden  sikirliche. 
Leaver  steorve  aperteliche, 
Than  thole  soche  wo  and  sorwe." 

Alisaundre,  a.d.  1300. 

"  I  hadde  lever  be  dede  or  she  had  any  dyseasse." 

"  Townley  Mysteries,"  1430. 

The  infinitive  might  be  with  or  without  the  particle  to 

"  He  hadde  lever  to  ben  anhong 
Than  to  be  forsworn." 

"  Amel  and  Amiloun,"  a.d.  1330. 

"  I  had  levdeyr  on  a  day  to  fight 
Than  alle  my  fathyrys  lend." 

Transl.  of  "  Torrent  of  Portugal,"  1370. 

Better  and  several  other  words  came  to  be  used  in  imitation 
of  liever,  which  last  has  been  completely  displaced  by  rather, 
comparative  of  rath,  soon. 

"  Better  he  had  to  have  be  away." — "  Torrent." 


Auxiliary  Verbs.  413 

As  soon,  as  well,  and  best  are  employed  in  nearly  the  same 
manner. 

"Then  you  had  as  good  vs\zk.t.  a  point  of  first  giving  away  your- 
self."— Goldsmith:  "Good.  Nat.  Man." 

"  I  had  as  liefe  haue  heard  the  night-rauen." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Much  Ado,"  ii.,  3. 

"  We  had  best  return  towards  the  boat." — Bulwer  :  "  Rienzi." 

Would  rather  may  always  be  substituted  for  had  rather. 
Might  rather  would  not  have  the  same  meaning.  Would 
and  should  do  not  go  well  with  better.  In  one  instance  can 
is  admissible.  "  I  can  better  afford^'  because  can  is  especially 
associated  with  afford.  We  may  say  might  better,  but  it  has 
neither  the  sanction,  the  idiomatic  force,  nor  the  precise 
meaning  of  had  better. 

BE. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  words  in  the  language. 
It  expresses  no  thing,  action,  quality,  relation,  or  condition, 
beyond  that  of  bare  existence.  It  is  said  to  be  wanting  in 
some  languages  ;  and  in  some  others  it  is  sparingly  employed. 
It  has  more  forms  than  any  other  English  verb — am,  art,  is, 
are,  was,  wast,  were,  wert,  be,  being,  been.  No  other  has 
more  than  eight.  It  alone  has  a  separate  form — am — for 
the  1st  pers.  sing.  pres.  and  for  the  sing,  of  the  past  tense 
— was.  It  is  the  only  verb  that  has  a  form — wert — found 
only  in  the  subjunctive,  of  which  hereafter. 

The  substantive  verb,  as  it  is  called,  is  derived  from  three 
separate  origins.  Be,  being,  been,  are  from  Sansk.  bhu,  to 
grow,  if  indeed  bhu,  the  earth,  be  not  still  earlier.  From  this 
fertile  source  sprang  the  Greek /^«^,  to  grow,  and  phuton,  a 
plant ;  the  Latin  fui,  I  have  been  ;  German  bauen,  to  build 
and  to  inhabit,  baiter,  a  farmer ;  Icelandic  bua,  to  build, 
to  dwell  and  to  till  the  ground  ;  and  English  words  so 
diverse  as  physic,  husband,  neighbor,  bower,  boorish,  and 
hy-law.  From  the  Sansk.  root  as,  to  which  some  assign  the 
primary  sense  to  breathe,  and  others,  to  dwell,  come  am^ 


414  English  Grammar. 

art,  are,  is.  Was,  wast,  etc.,  are  from  the  Sansk.  vas,  to  dwell. 
The  r  is  in  all  cases  due  to  the  common  transformation 
of  s. 

The  auxilary  is  used  to  form  the  passive  side  of  transitive 
verbs,  by  being  placed  before  their  past  participles. 

ACTIVE  PASSIVE 

I  love  I  am  loved 

we  saw  we  were  seen 

you  will  meet  you  will  be  met 

he  has  paid  he  has  been  paid 

they  have  heard  they  had  been  heard. 

The  simple  tenses  of  this  verb  are  used  with  infinitives  to 
form  a  kind  of  future.  "  He  is  to  saiiy  "  They  were  to 
arrive."  It  is  thus  used  also  with  the  infinitive  forms  of 
itself.  "  There  is  to  be  an  auction."  "  There  was  to  have 
been  a  wedding."  "  He  is  to  be  captain."  It  is  only  the 
simple  tenses  that  are  so  used. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  CONJUGATION  OF  VERBS. 

By  means  of  internal  changes,  appropriate  terminations, 
auxiliary  verbs,  particles,  and  even  change  of  position,  verbs 
are  enabled  to  represent  actions  under  a  great  variety  of 
conditions.  The  orderly  presentation  of  these  modifications 
is  called  conjugation.  The  word  signifies  joining  or  yoking 
together,  and  is  more  especially  applicable  to  the  joining  of 
verbs  with  the  pronouns  that  often  accompany  them. 

I         is  joined  with  am 
thou  "       "         "      art  . 
he       "       "         "        is 
we  are 

but  the  term  is  made  to  include  many  other  combinations. 
When  one  repeats  the  whole  body  of  such  combinations  for 
any  particular  verb,  he  is  said  to  conjugate  it. 

The  kinds  of  distinction  made  in  conjugating  are  five. 

1.  The  subject  or  person  spoken  of  may  be  represented 
either  as  acting  or  as  acted  upon. 

George  loves.  George  is  loved. 

In  the  former  the  verb  is  said  to  be  active  ;  in  the  latter 
passive.  The  not  very  apt  term  voice  is  used  to  express  the 
distinction,  and  the  one  form  is  said  to  be  in  the  active  voice 
and  the  other  in  the  passive  voice. 

2.  A  verb  may  be  so  used  as  to  express  an  assertion  out- 
right, a  question,  a  supposition  a  command,  an  entreaty,  or 
even  in  so  general  a  way  as  to  present  no  such  particular 
aspect.     Distinctions  of  this  kind  are  called  moods  or  modes. 

415 


41 6  English  Grammar. 

3.  An  action  may  be  represented  as  going  on  now,  as 
performed  some  time  ago,  or  expected  hereafter.  Such  dis- 
tinctions of  time  are  called  tenses.  The  word  is  from  the 
Old  French  tens,  a  degradation  of  the  Lat.  tempus,  time. 

4.  The  action  may  be  represented  as  that  of  the  speaker, 
of  the  person  spoken  to,  or  of  any  one  else.  The  one  who 
speaks  is  called  the  first  persoji,  the  one  addressed  is  the 
second  person,  and  the  third  person  may  be  all  the  world 
besides.     This  is  the  distinction  of  person. 

5.  But  several  persons  may  be  spoken  of  together,  many 
may  be  addressed  at  once,  and  although  usually  only  one 
speaks,  he  may  be  so  associated  with  others  as  to  be  merely 
their  mouthpiece.  He  may  speak  for  or  about  any  number 
of  whom  he  is  one.  Herein  is  the  distinction  of  number, 
the  numbers  we  have  to  do  with  being  two,  the  singular  and 
the  plural. 

A  verb  then,  in  addition  to  its  essential  meaning,  which 
distinguishes  it  from  other  verbs,  needs  to  express  the  cir- 
cumstances of  Voice,  Mood,  Tense,  Person,  and  Number.  Three 
of  these  present  no  difficulty,  but  grammarians  have  dis- 
agreed, and  are  likely  to  disagree,  about  the  numbers  and 
characters  of  the  moods  and  tenses.  Any  one  may  make  an 
analysis  of  them  satisfactory  to  himself,  but  no  one  has  suc- 
ceeded yet  in  satisfying  every  one  else.  We  may  begin 
with  the  easiest  and  consider  together  Person  and  Number, 
as  they  are  inseparably  connected. 

PERSON    AND   NUMBER. 

To  any  people  having  personal  pronouns  it  would  readily 
occur  to  join  them  in  some  way  with  the  verb,  and  say,  for 
example,  /  love,  thou  love,  lie  love,  zve  love,  etc.  It  would  do 
just  as  well  to  put  the  pronoun  after  the  verb  and  say,  love 
I,  love  thou,  love  he,  love  we.  Now,  however  the  pronoun  be 
placed,  it  and  the  verb  are  liable  to  become  so  united  in 
conversation  as  to  be  pronounced  like  one  word — witness, , 
I'm, you  're,  we  'II — and  it  is  certain  that  if  the  pronoun  be 
placed  last,  it  is  apt  to  be  clipped  and  obscured  in  hurried 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  417 

speech  till  little  or  nothing  of  it  may  be  left.  And  as  it  is 
well  known  that  compound  words  often  preserve  their  parts 
better  than  those  parts  are  preserved  singly,  it  may  happen 
in  the  course  of  ages  that  the  independent  pronouns  in  use 
are  no  longer  identifiable  with  the  fragments  attached  to 
verbs.  Nay,  people  speaking  a  language  every  day  may  not 
recognize  the  fragments  as  having  any  meaning,  and  when 
they  wish  to  be  quite  explicit,  saying,  thou  love-st,  he  love-th, 
do  in  effect  say,  tkou  love-thou,  he  love-he.  The  nature  of 
these  suffixed  pronominal  relics  was  first  learned  from 
Hebrew,  in  which  they  have  been  better  preserved  than  in 
the  Aryan  languages.  But  it  is  supposed  that  in  the  latter, 
far  away  in  the  prehistoric  ages,  there  were  three  pronouns, 
'pna,  sa,  ta  corresponding  to  /  or  me,  thou  and  he.^  They 
have  not  survived  in  those  forms,  but  many  scattered  facts 
would  be  united  and  made  consistent  by  the  supposition. 
As  suffixes  to  verbs  and  modified  into  mi,  si,  ti,  they  are 
common  in  Sanscrit  and  not  unknown  in  Greek' ;  yet  in 
both  languages  they  are  unlike  the  separate  pronouns.  A 
plural  ma  -\-  sa,  or  mi  -\-  si,  I  and  thou,  that  is  we,  might  be 
formed.  In  point  of  fact  it  is  formed  in  the  oldest  Sanskrit 
in  the  compromise  form  of  ma-si.  In  like  manner  an  ending 
ta-si,  he  and  thou,  that  is  ye,  is  said  to  have  existed  once, 
but  what  is  really  formed  now  is  -thas  for  the  dual  number, 
z.nA-tha  for  the  plural.  Another  ending,  -anti,  equivalent  to 
they,  is  well  known,  but  of  uncertain  origin.  If  we  join  these 
endings,  by  the  help  of  a  connecting  vowel,  to  the  simplest 
form  of  a  verb,  we  shall  have  a  small  part  of  a  Sanskrit 
conjugation.     Let  vad  =  speak,  then  : 

vad-a-mi  I  speak 

vad-a-si  thou  speakest 

vad-a-ti  he  speaks 

vad-a-ma-si  *  we  speak 

vad-a-tha  ye  speak 

vad-anti  they  speak 

*  Whitney  :  "  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,"  266,  267. 
'  KUhner's  Greek  Grammar.     Verbs  in  /it. 
'  In  later  Sanskrit  it  is  mas  or  mah. 

'7  ,  ^ 


41 8.  English  Grammar, 

There  is  a  set  of  secondary  terminations,  somewhat  further 
pared  down,  employed  in  some  of  the  moods  and  tenses. 
Thus  the  imperfect  prefixes  a,  as  an  augment  and  sufifixes 
the  shorter  endings 

a-vad-a-m  I  spoke 

a-vad-a-s  thou  spokest 

a-vad-a-t  he  spoke 

a-vad-5-ma  we  spoke 

a-vad-a-ta  ye  spoke 

a-vad-an  they  spoke. 

The  Latin  scholar  will  recognize  here  the  close  resemblance 
to  terminations  with  which  he  is  familiar : 

leg-a-m  leg-a-mus 

leg-a-s  leg-a-tis 

leg-a-t  leg-ant. 

Old  High  German  preserved  the  family  likeness  fairly  well 
but  a  process  of  obliteration  has  been  everywhere  going  on. 
We  may  take  the  word  j'fw^ and  exhibit  the  personal  endings 
of  Old  High  German,  Old  Saxon  and  Anglo-Saxon  : 


{I St  pers. 
2d  pers. 
3d  pers. 
r  ist  pers. 
Plur.  -j  2d  pers. 
13d  pers. 

Six  terminations  have  now  been  reduced  to  four,  almost  to 
three,  there  being  only  a  difference  of  connecting  vowel 
between  jindeth  and  findath ;  and  that  will  not  last  long. 
The  termination  -st  may  appear  as  a  novelty,  but,  although 
not  common,  it  occurs  in  the  Gothic  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury. Its  origin  is  conjectural.  The  Teutonic  settlers  in 
the  British  Islands  no  doubt  had  marked  differences  of  dia- 
lect from  the  first,  which  have  not  yet  disappeared.  If  we 
select  then  the  twelfth  century,  when  materials  are  tolerably 
abundant,  we  shall  find  among  the  mixed  population  of 
Angles,  Danes,  and   Northmen  north  of  the    H umber,  in- 


0.  H.  G. 

0.  s. 

A.-S. 

find-u 

find-u 

find-e 

find-i-s 

find-i-s 

find-e-st 

find-i-t 

find-i-d 

find-e-th 

find-a-mes 

find-a-d 

find-a-th 

find-a-t 

find-a-d 

find-a-th 

find-ant 

find-a-d 

find-a-th 

The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  419 

eluding  the  lowlands  of  Scotland,  a  marked  simplicity  in 
their  vowel  and  inflectional  systems.  They  made  no  distinc- 
tion of  person  or  number  in  their  verbs,  adding  es  through- 
out in  the  present  tense  and  nothing  in  the  past.  In  the 
south  of  England  the  present  tense  was  conjugated  : 

Ich  find-e  we  find-e-th 

thu  find-e-st  ye  find-e-th 

he  find-e-th  hi  find-e-th  ' 

The  intermediate  district  between  the  Humber  and  the 
Thames  differed  somewhat  from  both  ;  and  even  its  east 
and  west  portions  differed  from  each  other.  These  last  are 
known  to  the  students  of  English  dialects  as  the  East-Mid- 
land and  the  West-Midland.  The  former  conjugated  the 
singular  after  the  southern  model,  the  latter  almost  like 
the  northern,  while  they  agreed  in  ending  the  plural  in  -en 
throughout.  We  may  place  the  three  local  conjugations 
side  by  side,  thus : 

NORTHERN  MIDLAND  SOUTHERN 

1ST  Pers.  Sing.  find-e-s  find-e  find-e 

2D  Pers.  Sing.  find-e-s  find-e-s  (or  st)  find-e-st 

3D  Pers.  Sing.  find-e-s  find-e-s  (or  th)  find-e-th 

All  Pers.  Plu.  find-e-s  find-en  find-e-th 

The  plural  termination  -en  began  to  encroach  on  the  others 
before  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  was  the  pre- 
vailing form  for  a  hundred  years  or  so,  and  then  gradually 
disappeared,  leaving  the  bare  verb.  It  is  said  that  it  may 
still  be  heard  in  Lancashire.  Spenser  has  it  when  it  suits 
his  rhythm  ;  but  then  Spenser  was  not  only  a  poet,  but  one 
very  fond  of  very  old  words.  The  termination  of  the  2d 
pers.  sing.,  whenever  used,  is  that  of  the  south — st — to 
this  day.  There  are  four  words,  however — art,  wert,  wilt, 
shalt, — in  which  only  t  is  added.  The  northern  -es,  generally 
shortened  to  -s,  is  retained  for  the  3d  pers.  sing. ;  but  now 
and  then,  on  fit  occasion,  we  may  have  recourse  to  the 
southern  -etJt.  Indeed,  the  conflict  between  these  two  little 
endings  may  be  said  to  have  lasted  six  hundred  years. 
Professor  Whitney  says    that    "  s   as    ending   of   the    third 


420  English  Grammar. 

person  of  the  verb  is  rare  in  Chaucer,  and  quite  unknown 
a  little  earlier."  '  He  possibly  means  that  it  was  known 
long  before  Chaucer's  time,  but  had  temporarily  dis- 
appeared ;  yet  that  is  not  the  most  natural  construction 
to  put  upon  his  words.  Dr.  Morris,  in  the  introduction  to 
his  critical  edition  of  Chaucer,  says :  "  The  singular  in  -es 
or  -is  is  not  sanctioned  by  the  best  manuscripts.  It  is, 
however,  the  ordinary  inflection  of  the  Verb  in  all  Northern 
dialects."  The  following  examples  from  among  many  will 
show  the  use  of  the  verbal  termination  s,  with  or  without  a 
connecting  vowel,  before  the  time  of  Chaucer,  a.d.  1340: 

"  Upsteigh  til  heven,  sittes  on  right  hand 
Of  God  Fadir  alle  mightand." 

"  Creed  "  of  1240. 
"  Hwat  is  that  lict  in  ure  dene  ! 
Ris  up  Grim,  and  loke  wat  it  menes." 

"  Havelok  the  Dane,"  1300. 
"  Lauerd,  this  is  a  mikel  hete, 
Itgreues  vs  it  is  sua  grete." 

"  Cursor  Mundi,"  1320. 
"  Sain  Jerom  telles  that  fiften 
Ferle  takeninges  sal  be  sen 
Befor  the  day  of  dom." 

"  Homilies  in  Verse,"  1330. 
"  For  vnnethes  es  a  child  bom  fully 
That  it  ne  bygynnes  to  goule  and  cry  ; 
And  by  that  cry  men  may  knaw  than 
Whether  it  is  man  or  woman. 
For  if  it  be  a  man,  it  says  *  a,  a,' 
That  the  first  letter  es  of  the  nam 
Of  our  forme-fader  Adam. 
And  if  the  child  a  woman  be, 
When  it  es  born,  it  says  *  e,  e.' 
E  is  the  first  letter  and  the  hede 
Of  the  name  Eue  that  bygan  our  dede."  " 

Robert  Rolle,  1340. 

'  "  Language  and  the  Study  of  Language,"  93. 
•  Morris  :  "  Specimens  of  Early  English,"  vol.  ii. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  42*1 

Two  things  contributed  to  gain  currency  for  the  northern 
termination — intercourse  with  nations,  especially  the  French, 
who  are  without  the  sound  of  th  and  the  requirements  of 
versification.  The  termination  -th  adds  a  syllable  not  added 
by  s,  to  all  verbs  except  do,  have,  say,  and  those  that  end 
with  a  sibilant  ;  and  it  is  a  convenience  to  be  able  at  will  to 
use  a  shorter  form.  Hence  the  ending  -s  is  much  more  fre- 
quent in  poetry  than  in  prose  of  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teeth  centuries.  In  the  first  part  of  Raleigh's  "  History," 
written  between  1603  and  161 2,  of  200  verbs  (that  is,  verbs 
that  might  take  the  ending  -th  or  -j)  only  three  end  in  -s,  and 
those  in  a  poetical  quotation.  The  author  adopted  -s  him- 
self before  the  end  of  his  work.  The  "  Meditationes  Histori- 
cae  "  of  Philip  Camerarius  were  translated  into  English  by 
John  Molle  and  printed  in  London  in  162 1.  Of  200  verbs 
in  the  first  part  185  end  in  -th,  and  15  in  -j.  Of  these  15,  9  are 
found  in  the  few  verses  of  poetry  quoted.  A  like  sample 
from  Shakespeare's  "  Merchant  of  Venice"  yields  57  in  -th 
and  143  in  -s.  What  is  still  more  conclusive  for  the  influence 
of  poetry  in  the  matter,  I  find  in  a  sample  from  Spenser's 
"  Fairie  Queene"  (a.d.  1590)  86  ending  in  -th  and  114  in  -s  ; 
and  of  the  86,  54  are  either  doth  or  hath,  in  which  th  does  not 
add  a  syllable.  The  graver  class  of  English  writers  were 
slow  to  accept  -s,  even  in  the  seventeenth  century.  It  is  rare 
in  Bacon  and  excluded  altogether  from  the  Bible.  Sir 
Thomas  Browne's  "  Pseudoxia,"  A.D.  1658,  has  159  verbs 
ending  in  -th  to  41  in  -s. 

The  present  arrangement  of  personal  endings  is : 


PRESENT    TENSE. 

I  call 

we  call 

thou  call-est 

you  call 

he  call-s  (or  -eth) 

they  call 

PAST    TENSE. 

I  called 

we  called 

thou  called-est 

you  called 

he  called 

they  called. 

422  English  Grammar. 

As  -est  and  -eth  are  scarcely  used  except  in  solemn  poetry, 
devotional  exercises,  and  burlesque,  for  the  general  business 
of  life  our  verbs  add  but  one  personal  ending,  -s,  with  a  con- 
necting vowel  e  when  necessary.  This  remote  and  unrecog- 
nizable descendant  of  the  primitive  ta  or  ti  is  limited  to  the 
present  tense,  third  person,  singular,  and  is  not  of  the  slight- 
est use  even  there.  It  is  well  to  know  just  how  much,  or  if 
you  choose,  how  little,  of  personality  is  left. 

The  termination  -est  of  the  2d  pers.  sing,  is  sometimes 
omitted  from  the  past  tense  in  poetry. 

"  That  morning,  thou  that  slumbered  not  before 
Nor  slept,  great  Ocean  !  laid  thy  waves  to  rest, 
And  hushed  thy  mighty  minstrelsy.     No  breath 
Thy  deep  composure  stirred,  no  fin,  no  oar. 
Like  beauty  newly  dead,  so  calm,  so  still. 
So  lovely,  thou,  beneath  the  light  that  fell 
From  angel-chariots  sentinelled  on  high, 
Reposed  and  listened,  and  saw  thy  living  change. 
Thy  dead  arise." 

Pollock's  "  Course  of  Time." 

THE  TENSES  OF  VERBS. 

Actions  involve  time  as  a  condition,  and  the  particular 
time  it  is  often  important  to  show.  One  way  of  doing  this, 
when  applicable,  is  always  effective,  and  that  is  to  give  the 
day,  hour,  and  minute.  When  that  can  be  done  the  form  of 
the  verb  is  of  no  importance.  "  I  see  at  this  moment  "  ;  "  I  see 
on  the  fourteenth  of  last  June  at  2  h.  13  m.  P.M. " ;  "I  see 
without  spectacles  during  these  twenty  years,"  are  alike  un- 
mistakable, if  such  were  the  usage ;  and  there  would  be  no 
need  to  say  :  **  I  see,"  "  I  saw,"  "  I  have  seen."  Or,  like  the 
Chinese,  we  might  have  an  unchangeable  verb,  and  an  assort- 
ment of  adverbs  meaning  something  like  long  ago,  last  year, 
last  month,  yesterday,  now,  to-morrow,  by  and  by,  hereafter, 
etc.,,  which  might  be  enlarged  to  any  desired  extent.  These 
expedients  are  precise,  especially  the  first,  but  rather 
unwieldy ;    and  so  language  has  generally  provided  some 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  423 

short  easy  way  of  indicating  the  time  of  an  action  relatively 
to  some  other  action,  or  to  some  point  understood.  When 
we  say  "  I  see"  and  "  I  saw  "/  the  former  refers  the  act 
of  seeing  to  the  time  of  speaking,  the  latter  refers  it  to  some 
earlier  time.  But  unless  we  call  in  aid  some  other  words 
that  is  all  the  distinction  of  time  that  our  English  verb 
admits  of.  I  see  and  I  saw  is  the  whole  extent.  But  if  addi- 
tional words  be  used  the  distinctions  of  time  may  become 
infinite  in  number  and  variety.  This  holds  true  of  change 
of  form  in  words,  whether  called  declension,  conjugation,  or 
anything  else.  The  inflections  are  never  sufficient,  and  have 
to  be  supplemented  by  auxiliary  words.  The  auxiliary 
words  are  sufficient  to  do  without  the  inflections  altogether, 
but  they  are  lengthy.  Inflections  are  a  short-hand  method 
of  doing  a  few  easy  things. 

Now  the  distinctions  of  time  that  various  peoples  have 
woven  into  the  texture  of  their  languages  may  be  very 
unlike,  and  curiously  unlike,  what  most  persons  would 
expect.  Ninety-nine  in  a  hundred,  who  would  think  of  the 
matter  at  all,  would  think  it  too  obvious  to  admit  of  any 
difference  of  opinion — that  time  is  either  past,  present,  or 
future — there  can  be  no  other.  Of  course  the  past  and 
future  can  be  further  subdivided  if  needful.  But  consider 
for  a  moment  what  is  meant  by  the  present.  Is  it  this 
year  ?  Part  of  the  year  is  past  and  part  future  :  how  much 
of  it  is  present  ?  Or  is  it  this  day  ?  Part  of  that  too  is 
past  and  part  future ;  and  so  of  this  hour  or  minute.  As 
there  is  not  an  inch  of  the  earth's  surface  that  is  not  either 
north  or  south  of  the  equator,  so  all  time  is  either  past  or 
future.  The  present  becomes  a  mathematical  point  or  line, 
without  breadth ;  having  only  position,  and  that  an  ever 
shifting  one.  Moreover,  it  will  be  seen  hereafter  that  our 
Teutonic  ancestors  did  not  impress  a  threefold  division 
of  time  upon  their  language. 

Besides  representing  an  action  as  taking  place  before, 
after,  or  during  some  other  action,  several  further  circum- 
stances are  also  noted.  It  may  be  regarded  as  completed  or 
as  still  going  on,  as  instantaneous  or  extending  over  a  long 


424  English  Grammar, 

time.  Again,  an  action  may  be  ended  once  for  all,  or 
repeated  at  intervals.  We  thus  have  a  case  of  permutations 
and  combinations  that  may  amount  to  a  large  aggregate  num- 
ber. Accordingly,  grammarians  are  far  from  agreeing  upon 
the  number  of  tenses  recognizable  in  the  English  language. 
Harris,  one  of  the  most  learned  and  philosophical  of  them,, 
reckoned  twelve.  He  first  divided  all  action,  or  rather  all 
time,  into  present,  past,  and  future  ;  next,  each  of  these  divi- 
sions had  a  beginning,  middle,  and  end,  making  nine  subdi- 
visions. The  primary  and  secondary  divisions  made  twelve. 
The  first,  or  main  division  was  into  present,  past,  and  future 
aorists 


Present 

I  write 

scribe 

Past 

I  wrote 

scripsi 

Future 

I  shall  write 

scribam 

Each  one  was  then  divided  into  beginning,  continuing,  and 
finishing  the  action. 

I  was  going  to  write  scripturus  eram 

I  was  writing  scribebam 

I  had  written  scripseram 

I  am  going  to  write  scripturus  sum 

I  am  writing  scribo,  scribens  sum 

I  have  written  scripsi 

I  shall  be  beginning  to  write  scripturus  ero 

I  shall  be  writing  scribam,  scribens  ero 

I  shall  have  written  scripsero 

Here  was  a  table  laid  out  for  the  absolute  divisions  of  time 
without  reference  to  the  expressions  that  any  given  lan- 
guage might  have  in  use.  If  English,*  Dutch,  and  Chinese 
could  not  fill  all  the  spaces,  they  might  leave  them  empty. 
A  somewhat  inferior  arrangement  of  these  twelve  tenses 
is  given  in  a  little  book  called  "  Outlines  of  English  Gram- 
mar," by  C.  P.  Mason,  Fellow  of  University  College,  London, 
which  reached  its  tenth  edition  in  1883.     Others  again,  like 

'  "  Hermes  ;  or,  A  Philosophical  Inquiry  Concerning  Universal  Grammar," 
by  James  Harris,  Esq.     London,  1751. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  425 

Lowth,  Dalton,  and  Cobbett,  still  thinking  of  the  meta- 
physical division  of  time  rather  than  the  facts  of  language, 
make  three — past,  present,  and  future.  Among  those  who 
view  the  matter  from  the  philological  side,  Dr.  Latham  and 
Prof.  Whitney  admit  only  two  real  tenses,  the  present  and 
past,  as  we  have  separate  and  single  terms  for  them — see  and 
saw,  write  and  wrote,  smile  and  smiled.  It  is  evident  that 
whatever  disagreement  there  is  relates  only  to  the  meaning 
of  the  terms  used,  the  one  party  intending  an  a  priori  divi- 
sion of  the  time  of  actions,  the  other  having  in  view  expres- 
sions of  common  English  speech.  A  third  division  might 
be  made  by  enumerating  the  expressions  that  might  be 
readily  met  with  distinguishing  the  time  of  actions,  includ- 
ing their  commencement,  continuance,  termination,  fre- 
quency, and  repetition.  In  that  way  considerably  more 
than  twenty  tenses  might  be  counted  up ;  but  there  is  no 
precise  limit  to  them,  and  every  one  has  an  equal  right 
to  enumerate  as  many  as  he  pleases.  But  far  the  greater 
number  of  persons  have  reckoned  them  at  six.  For  doing 
this  they  have  had  the  poorest  of  reasons — that  there  are 
six  in  Latin.  If  we  had  been  nursed  on  Greek  for  the  last 
thousand  years,  we  should  undoubtedly  have  had  seven  ;  if 
Hebrew  had  been  the  language  of  the  Church  and  the 
schools,  we  should  now  have  only  two.  For  those  six  tenses 
the  Latin  has  six  simple  expressions,  while  we  have  only  two. 
Placing  them  in  the  order  of  time,  they  are  as  follows : 

Pluperfect  scripseram  I  had  written 

Perfect  scripsi  I  wrote 

Imperfect  scribebam  I  kept  writing 

Present  scribo  I  write 

Future-perfect  scripsero  I  shall  have  written 

Future  scribam  I  shall  write 

On  this  basis  far  the  greater  number  have  reckoned  six 
tenses  in  English,  with  the  above  names,  or  nearly  the  same, 
In  arranging  them  the  grammarian  usually  places  the  pres- 
ent first,  then  works  backward  to  the  pluperfect,  next  jumps 
from  the  far  away  past  to  the  future,  and  ends  with  the 


426  English  Grammar. 

future-perfect.  This  scheme  has  been  so  long  and  familiarly 
known,  and  is  so  nearly  equal  in  merit  to  any  other  yet  pro- 
posed, that  little  is  to  be  gained  by  a  change.  Of  course  it 
is  obvious  that  only  two  of  these  tenses  can  be  expressed  in 
a  single  word,  which  may  be  taken  to  be  native  and  prime- 
val. All  the  others  may  be  regarded  as  later  and  artificial 
combinations.  Of  these  six  then,  real  or  supposed,  I  shall 
offer  a  few  remarks. 

Present. — The  ancestors  of  the  Slavonic  and  Teutonic 
nations  seem  to  have  had  from  the  earliest  times  that  we 
know  of  only  two  distinct  and  developed  tenses,  correspon- 
ding to  the  English,  I  write  and  I  wrote.  These  have  been 
reckoned  as  Present  and  Past.  None  of  them  have  a  corre- 
sponding form  for  the  future.  In  time  the  Slavonic  race 
developed  a  future  for  the  verb  to  be,  by  means  of  which 
futures  for  the  other  verbs  were  formed,  somewhat  like, 
will  be  writing ;  consisting,  however,  of  only  two  words. 
By  the  aid  of  auxiliaries  still  preserved  as  separate  words 
many  other  temporal  distinctions  have  from  time  to  time 
been  added. 

It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  the  important  and  highly 
developed  Shemitic  languages,  as  Arabic  and  Hebrew,  have 
only  two  tenses,  commonly  called  the  Past  and  the  Future 
with  no  Present.  All  Shemitic  scholars  are  aware  that  the 
terms  do  not  fit  well.     Caspari  says : 

"  The  temporal  forms  of  Arabic  are  two,  with  in  a  general  way 
the  distinction,  that  the  first  indicates  a  completed,  the  second 
an  uncompleted  action.  *  *  *  The  names  Preterit  and  Fu- 
ture, by  which  they  are  usually  distinguished,  are  given  up,  as 
not  corresponding  accurately  with  their  import."* 

But  is  not  this  the  case  also  with  the  European  lan- 
guages ?  The  point  of  separation  in  both  cases  seems  to  me 
to  be  not  one  of  time,  but  the  distinction  between  a  thing 
done,  and  one  not  yet  done, — between  what  is  finished  and 
what  is  unfinished.  Finished  action  or  work  is  wholly  in 
the  past ;  what  is  unfinished  is,  in  whole  or  in  part  future. 

*  Arabic  Grammar,  book  ii. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  dfi'j 

Confining  ourselves  now  to  our  own  language,  the  distinc- 
tion is  best  preserved  in  our  two  participles.  If  a  house  is 
huilt,  the  work  is  ended.  So  long  as  we  are  building  a 
house,  part  of  the  work  is  past  and  part  future,  only  the 
point  of  separation  between  the  two  being  present.  But 
when  of  two  expressions  one  is  wholly  appropriated  to  the 
past,  the  other  must  serve  for  both  present  and  future. 
So  from  the  earliest  times  known  our  northern  ancestors 
had  but  a  single  form  for  both.  Mere  futurity  is  almost 
invaribly  thus  expressed  by  Ulfilas.  Such  too  was  the  rule 
in  Anglo-Saxon,  although  a  rule  gradually  relaxed.  The 
address  of  the  angel  to  Mary  (Luke  i.,  31)  translated  from 
the  A.S.  Gospels  would  read  thus : 

"  Truly  now  thou  conceivest^  and  bearest  a  son  and  namest  his 
name  Healer.  He  is  great,  and  called  the  son  of  the  Highest ; 
and  the  Lord  God  giveth  him  the  seat  of  his  father  David.  And  he 
reigntth  in  Jacob's  house  forever,  and  of  his  kingdom  there  is  no 
end." 

The  present  is,  and  always  has  been  one  means  for  ex- 
pressing the  future. 

"  AUe  other  wommen  I  forsake. 
And  to  an  elf  queen  I  me  take. 
By  dale  and  eek  by  doune." 

Chaucer  :  "  C.  T.,"  15,201. 
"  I  drinke  the  aire  before  and  returne 
Or  ere  your  pulse  twice  beate." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Tempest,"  v.,  i. 
"  Wring  the  black  drop  from  your  heart, 
And  to-morrow  unites  us  no  more  to  part 

******** 

to-morrow  we  give  to  the  slaughter  and  flame 
The  sons  and  the  shrines  of  the  Christian  name." 

Byron  :  "  Siege  of  Corinth." 
"  *  It  was   lucky  for  you,  young  man,'  said  Antony  Vander 
Heyden,  that  you  happened  to  be  knocked  overboard  to-day,  as 
to-morrow  morning  we  start  early  on  our  return." 

Washington  Irvinp. 


428  English  Grammar. 

The  present  is  more  especially  used  in  suppositions  with 
such  words  as  whoever,  whenever,  when,  until. 

"  Eat  ye  every  one  of  his  own  vine,  and  every  one  of  his 
fig  tree,  and  drink  ye  every  one  the  waters  of  his  own  cistern  ; 
until  I  come  and  take  you  away  to  a  land  like  your  own." 

Isaiah  xxxvi.,  16. 

In  such  cases  an  interpolated  shall  would  be  stiff  and  cum- 
brous. 

"  Blessed  are  ye  when  men  shall  revile  you  and  persecute 
you,  and  say  all  manner  of  evil  against  you  falsely." 

Matt,  v.,  ii. 

"We  shall  be  obliged  to  hold  our  judgments  suspended  until 
the  general  relations  of  the  north-eastern  Asiatic  languages  are 
better  settled." — Prof.  Whitney  :  "  Language,"  etc. 

"Every  person  specified  *  *  *  in  the  following  section, 
who  has  been  since  the  fourth  day  of  May,  eighteen  hundred 
sixty-one,  or  who  is  hereafter  disabled." 

"  If  any  person  embraced  within  the  provisions  of  sections 
*  *  *  has  died  since  the  fourth  day  of  March,  *  *  *  or 
hereafter  dies'' — " U.  S.  Revised  Statutes,"  4,692,  4,702. 

There  are  reckoned  three  forms  of  the  present  tense. 

I  write  I  do  write  I  am  writing 

No  particular  term  is  needed  to  describe  the  first,  which  is 
regarded  as  the  original  or  normal  form.  The  second  is 
called  the  emphatic,  the  third  the  progressive  or  continuous. 
The  second — with  do — is  used  to  reiterate  or  enforce  a  state- 
ment, especially  when  doubted  or  disputed.  It  is  also 
necessary  in  interrogative  and  negative  sentences — ^^  Did 
you  see  the  fire  ?  "  "I  did  see  it" — for  we  have  abandoned 
the  much  neater  expressions :  Saw  you  the  fire  ?  and  I 
saw  it  not.  Do  is  not  used  with  other  auxiliaries  nor  gen- 
erally with  the  verb  to  be.  We  may  say :  "  I  did  have  an 
umbrella,"  but  not,  "  I  did  be  there."  The  difference 
between  the  other  two  forms  may  be  illustrated  thus : 

}ohn  plays  the  fiddle  George  is  playing  the  fiddle 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  429 

The  first  can  play,  and  has  been  known  at  sundry  times 
to  entertain  himself  and  friends  in  that  way,  but  has  not 
drawn  a  bow  these  six  months.  The  other  is  playing  at 
this  moment ;  listen  to  him !  The  simple  expression,  in 
most  instances,  is  not  really  a  present  in  signification,  but 
represents  a  long-continued  habit — continued  in  the  past 
and  expected  in  the  future.  No  one  says :  "  I  build  a 
house"  or  "  I  write  an  article  for  a  magazine  ;  "  for  these  are 
not  continuous  habits ;  but  one  may  say :  "  I  build  houses" 
or  "  I  am  just  now  writing  an  article"  This  distinction  is 
confined  chiefly  to  verbs  that  express  some  kind  of  activity, 
employment,  or  habit,  and  does  not  apply  to  those  that 
represent  perceptions  or  sensations.  I  see  a  column  of 
smoke  rising,  hear  a  steam  whistle,  feel  chilly.  I  am  listen- 
ing to  the  music,  but  hear  the  alarm  bell. 

Past  or  Preterit. — This  is  the  only  other  tense  expres- 
sible by  a  single  word — "  The  sun  rose  "/  "  The  ship  sailed" ; 
"We  all  waited."  Like  the  present,  it  has  three  forms — 
"  The  ship  sailed,  was  sailing,  or  did  sail." — not  differing 
in  respect  of  time.  Several  names  have  been  applied  to 
this  tense,  no  one  of  which  is  perfectly  satisfactory.  It 
might  be  called  simply  the  past,  but  that  is  not  thought 
sufficiently  distinctive,  as  there  are  two  other  past  tenses. 
At  one  time  it  was  common  to  speak  of  it  as  the  imperfect ; 
because  it  did  not  in  itself  contain  a  reference  to  any 
other  event,  or  to  any  particular  time.  But  that  name  was 
found  objectionable  because  in  use  in  the  Greek  and  Latin 
grammars  to  denote  actions  at  once  prolonged  and  past. 
Those  languages  would  translate  by  the  imperfect — "  He 
wrote  six  months  "  ;  but  not,  "  He  wrote  a  poem."  But  the 
English  tense — whatever  we  may  call  it — does  not  maintain 
this  distinction.  If,  however,  we  wish  to  make  prominent 
the  continuity  of  action,  we  employ  the  compound  form. 
He  was  writing,  continued  writing,  etc.  The  prefix  preter 
or  prceter  (Latin  prceter,  past,  beyond)  was  sometimes 
applied  to  all  the  past  tenses,  which  were  then  called  preter- 
imperfect,  preterperfect,  preterpluperfect ;  but  for  all  ration- 
al  purposes,  the  prefix  was    unnecessary,    and    has    been 


430  English  Grammar. 

generally  abandoned.  Finally  the  term  preterit  (Latin  prcB- 
teritus,  gone  by)  has  been  very  generally  applied  to  the 
tense  under  consideration,  not  only  in  English,  but  in  most 
of  the  languages  of  Europe.  The  word  has  a  feeble  and 
foreign  sound,  and  literally  means  no  more  than  past,  but  it 
is  widely  recognized  and  understood.  It  is  also  unambigu- 
ous, being  employed  solely  as  a  grammatical  term,  for  it 
would  be  insufferably  pedantic  to  speak  of  the  preterit  week 
or  preterit  joys.  Greek  grammar  is  familiar  with  a  tense 
called  the  aorist,  corresponding  precisely  to  our  simplest 
past,  and  like  it  used  in  narrating  past  events.  Aorist,  then, 
would  have  been  the  fittest  term  to  adopt ;  but  that  word 
has  never  obtained  currency  among  us  for  the  reason  that 
our  pattern  and  schoolmistress  was  not  Greek  but  Latin. 
The  most  appropriate  name  would  be  the  narrative  or 
historical  tense.  Opening  at  a  venture  Hume's  "  History 
of  England,"  I  find  of  200  consecutive  verbs,  180  of  this 
tense  and  20  of  the  pluperfect.  The  reader  can  now  have 
his  choice  of  names. 

"  I  wrote  a  book  "  expresses  action  past  and  ended  ;  "  I 
wrote  six  months  "  is  past,  prolonged,  and  ended — that  is,  my 
labor  on  it  is  ended;  "I  was  writing''  expresses  action 
continuous,  past,  but  unfinished.  All  the  tenses  except  the 
present  have  these  three  distinctions. 

Perfect. — What  is  called  the  perfect  tense  in  English  is 
always  formed  by  the  aid  of  the  auxiliary  have.  We  have 
already  seen  that  have  primarily  signifies  possession,  but 
that,  in  becoming  an  auxiliary,  it  passes  insensibly  into  com- 
binations in  which  possession  is  not  thought  of.  The  first 
departure  was  undoubtedly  a  sentence  like  this : 

I  have  trained  horses, 

which  is  ambiguous.  If  trained  hQ  associated  with  horses,  it 
is  an  adjective,  and  have,  standing  alone,  retains  its  original 
sense  of  possession.  But  if  it  be  joined  with  have,  the  two 
form  one  verb  in  the  perfect  tense.  Introduce  the  word  six, 
and  there  is  no  longer  ambiguity.     The  word  trained  must 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  431 

be  either  before  or  after  the  six,  which  can  only  belong  to 
the  noun.     There  are  then  the  two  distinct  alternatives  : 

I  have  six  trained  horses  ; 
I  have  trained  six  horses. 

This  tense  no  more  expresses  a  completed  or  finished 
action  than  any  other,  if  we  include  the  two  expressions : 

The  river  has  risen,  and  the  river  has  been  rising. 

Completion  or  continuance  depends  on  the  participle  em- 
ployed. Yet,  although  the  past  participle  generally  denotes 
completed  action,  it  is  sometimes  used  to  denote  what  is 
still  going  on.  "  I  have  lived  here  twenty  years  "  is  precisely 
equivalent  to  "  I  have  been  living  here  twenty  years."  I  have 
been  an  "  Odd  Fellow  ten  years,"  "  I  have  suffered  from 
headache  all  my  life  "  are  past  and  present,  with  a  prospect 
of  futurity. 

There  is  but  one  permanent  characteristic  of  the  perfect 
tense.  While  it  speaks  of  the  past  it  is  in  some  way  con- 
nected with  the  present.  "  I  have  hired  a  horse."  The 
implication  is  that  I  still  have  the  animal — have  a  hired 
horse.  Have  here  retains  with  us  a  trace  of  its  original 
present  signification.  This  perfect  connected  with  the 
present  may  reach  back  to  an  illimitable  past.  "  Matter 
has  existed  from  eternity  "  is  good  in  grammar,  however  it 
may  be  in  philosophy.  In  general  the  subject  or  actor  must 
still  exist,  also  the  object  or  thing  acted  upon ;  and  the  time, 
if  named,  must  always  include  the  present.  We  do  not  say 
of  a  deceased  person  that  he  has  done  this  or  that,  but  that 
he  did.  Still  to  this  there  are  exceptions.  Of  one  lately 
dead  we  sometimes  say  that  he  has  left  his  family  or  affairs 
in  such  or  such  a  condition,  and,  for  a  longer  period,  that  he 
has  left  us  his  example.  Of  one  who  died  leaving  writings 
or  literary  compositions  we  use  the  perfect  tense,  or  even 
the  present,  without  regard  to  lapse  of  time.  Homer  has 
described  the  descent  of  Odysseus  into  the  infernal  regions, 
and  exposes  the  demagogue  in  the  character  of  Thersites. 


432  English  Grammar, 

By  a  kind  of  poetic  figure  we  endow  the  author  with  per- 
petual life  ;  "  and  by  it  he  being  dead  yet  speaketh."  ' 

"  A B has  built  a  mill  "  is  said  only  while  both 

builder  and  mill  remain.  But  strangely  enough  we  may  say 
that  he  has  built  twenty  mills,  though  the  greater  part  of 
them  may  have  perished,  provided  they  be  so  scattered  in 
time  as  to  form  a  kind  of  habit  or  business  of  life.  The 
series  of  structures  may  not  yet  have  come  to  an  end. 

If  the  time  be  named,  it  must  include  the  present.  It 
may  be  of  any  length — this  century,  this  year,  this  week, 
to-day,  but  never  last  week  or  an  hour  ago.  Foreigners  are 
slow  to  learn  this  distinction,  and  are  apt  to  speak  of  what 
has  happened  yesterday  or  last  week.  Even  native  writers 
of  great  merit  sometimes  fall  into  this  solecism. 

"  I  make  no  doubt  they  have  figured  about  these  apartments  in 
days  long  past^  when  they  have  set  off  the  charms  of  some  peerless 
family  beauty,"  Irving  :   "  Bracebridge  Hall." 

A  kind  of  perfect  tense,  formed  of  the  past  participle  of 
intransitive  verbs  with  the  verb  to  be^  was  formerly  common, 
especially  about  the  beginning  of  the  last  century.  To  the 
perfect  was  naturally  added  a  pluperfect  of  the  same  type. 

"  I  am  in  blood 
Stept  in  so  farre,  that  should  I  wade  no  more, 
Returning  were  as  tedious  as  go  ore." 

Shakesp.  :   "Macbeth,"  iii.,  iv. 
"  They  were  got  about  two  miles  beyond  Barnet." 

Fielding  :   "Tom  Jones,"  12,  14. 
"  The  court  ivas  sat** — Addison  :  Spectator. 
"  The  horsemen  are  returned." — Id. 

This  use  of  the  verb  to  be  is  much  less  common  now,  and, 
except  with  those  who  affect  an  antiquated  style,  is  limited 
to  such  words  as  come,  go7ie,  flown,  fled,  risen,  fallen,  that  ex- 
press change  of  place  or  condition.  When  we  say  "  The 
column  is  fallen  "  we  do  not  think  of  its  recent  fall,  but  of  its 
present  prostration.    For  this  reason  we  say  "  Much  rain  has 

'  Hebrews  xi. ,  4. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  433 

fallen^''  but  not  "  Much  rain  is  fallen,''  for  as  soon  as  fallen 
it  ceases  to  be  rain.  In  short,  the  participle  in  such  connec- 
tion is  used  adjectively,  and  not  as  part  of  a  verb.  This  is 
made  clear  when  both  forms  of  expression  come  together. 

"  Ye  have  come  too  late — but  ye  are  come  !  " 

Coleridge  :  "  Piccolomini,"  i.,  i. 

This  is  equivalent  to  saying : 

"  You  have  come  too  late — still  you  are  here." 

If  we  take  "  The  boy  ts  grown "  for  a  perfect  tense,  we 
must  accept  "  The  boy  was  grown,''  as  a  pluperfect.  In 
that  case  what  tenses  are,  "  The  boy  has  been  grown,"  and 
"  The  boy  had  been  grown  "  f     Such  expressions  are  found. 

"  Amelia  and  her  companions  returned  *  *  *  laden  with 
trinkets  as  if  they  had  been  come  from  a  fair." 

Fielding:  "  Amelia,"  vi.,  i. 

If  in  the  last  example  but  one  we  substitute  large  for  grown 
the  matter  will  become  quite  simple. 

The  perfect  tense  of  all  transitive  verbs  is  to  be  formed 
with  have,  and  all  others  may  be  so  formed.  Except  in  the 
passive  of  transitive  verbs,  which  we  have  not  yet  reached, 
be  should  be  used  only  in  representing  a  condition,  not  an 
act. 

Pluperfect. — The  word  is  intended  to  signify  more  than 
perfect,  but  2i's>  perfect  in  grammar  does  not  mean  completed, 
S.O  pluperfect  does  not  mean  more  than  completed.  Indeed 
in  value  and  usage  there  is  no  relation  between  the  two, 
except  that  in  the  one  have  retains  its  present  reference,  and 
in  the  other  had  is  past.  The  two  never  come  together. 
The  pluperfect  expresses  an  action  or  event  not  only  past, 
but  prior  to  some  other  event  also  past ;  but  the  latter  is 
represented  by  the  preterit,  not  by  the  perfect. 

"  I  had  heard  that  before  you  came  " — not  "  before  you  have 

come'* 

"  Jacob  Bunting,  so  wc^  this  gentleman  called,  had  been  for 
38 


434  English  Grammar. 

many  years  in  the  King's  service,  in  which  he  had  risen  to  the 
rank  of  corporal,  and  had  saved  and //^ir/z^dT  together  a  small  in- 
dependence, upon  which  he  now  rented  his  cottage  and  enjoyed 
his  leisure." 

BuLWER  :  "  Eugene  Aram,"  i.,  i. 

There  are,  as  of  all  the  tenses,  the  two  forms,  ^^  I  had 
written"  and  "  I  had  been  writing"  with  the  usual  difference 
between  the  two  participles. 

Future, — It  has  been  already  observed  that  our  language 
never  had  at  any  known  period  a  single  word  for  the  future, 
and  that  Gothic  and  Anglo-Saxon  habitually  employed  the 
present  in  speaking  of  things  to  come.  Yet  both  those 
languages  would  on  rare  occasions,  in  order  to  show  how 
the  future  event  was  to  be  brought  about,  combine  an 
auxiliary  with  an  infinitive,  just  as  we  do.  Those  auxiliaries 
were  oftenest  will  and  shall,  of  which  the  first  expressed 
choice,  voluntary  determination,  the  second  some  external 
controlling  power  or  influence.  These  are  the  means  com- 
monly used  by  us  to  form  future  tenses.  The  difference 
between  will  and  shall,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  dis- 
cern, has  been  given  in  treating  of  the  auxiliaries ;  but  the 
subject  spreads  out  into  ramifications  so  slender  that  the 
distinction  becomes  scarcely  perceptible,  and  is  not  con- 
sistently maintained  even  by  very  careful  writers.  We  saw 
that  for  centuries  shall  was  used  almost  to  the  exclusion  of 
will,  except  in  expressing  a  mental  resolution  ;  but  that  for 
three  or  four  hundred  years  will  has  been  coming  more  and 
more  into  use.  Grammarians  are  apt  to  speak  of  this  some- 
what as  a  zealous  clergyman  would  of  the  neglect  of  the 
Sabbath  ;  but  in  the  interest  of  simplicity  and  intelligibility 
I  am  pleased  to  hear  people  say  that  things  will,  not  that 
they  shall  be  done.  Nearly  all  who  claim  to  be  authorities 
would  give  the  future  tense  of  the  verb  to  write  substantially 
in  the  following  form  : 

I  shall  write  We  shall  write 

Thou  wilt  write  You  will  write 

He  will  write  They  will  write. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  435 

But  this  formula  is  scarcely  ever  adhered  to  throughout. 
Except  in  prayer  and  solemn  poetry,  you  will  takes  the 
place  of  thou  wilt.  No  reason  but  of  the  flimsiest  kind  can 
be  given  to  justify  the  retention  of  /  shall  along  with  you 
will.  And  even  our  most  conservative  pedagogues  will 
allow  us  to  say  "  We  will  "  when  we  are  very  sure  of  any- 
thing. Hence  /  will  is  looked  on  as  a  more  positive  assur- 
ance than  /  shall.  The  strangest  anomaly  of  all  is  the  rule 
that  in  making  an  assertion  we  are  to  say  "  You  will"  but  in 
asking  a  question,  "  Shall  you  ?  "  The  reason  assigned  is  as 
strange  as  the  rule — namely,  that  we  should  shape  the 
question  in  imitation  of  the  answer  expected.'  I  am  not 
aware  that  a  similar  rule  or  reason  is  applied  to  anything 
else  in  the  world  but  the  word  shall.  At  page  392  I  have 
suggested  a  different  origin  for  the  anomaly,  yet  cannot  pre- 
tend to  know  the  reasons  which  govern  each  one  in  his 
choice  of  words. 

Several  other  phrases  that  serve  the  purpose  of  a  future 
tense  have  been  adopted  from  time  to  time.  The  oldest  of 
these,  found  already  in  the  Gothic  in  the  form  of  munan,  to 
think,  remember,  have  a  mind  to,  mean  to,  was  not  uncom- 
mon in  early  English,  forming  a  future,  like  will  or  shall, 

"  It  is  no  boyte  mercy  to  crave, 
For  if  I  do  I  mon  none  have." 

"  Townley  Mysteries." 

This  word  passed  out  of  use  in  English,  or  became  merged 
in  the  verb  to  mean.  It  survives  in  Scotland,  but  as  early 
as  the  times  of  Barbour  and  Gawin  Douglas  had  taken  the 
meaning  of  must. 

"  And  sen  I  maun  zour  erran  rin 
Sai  sair  against  my  will  ; 
I  'se  mak  a  vow  and  keep  it  trow, 
It  shall  be  done  for  ill." 

"  Ballad  of  Gil  Morrice." 

"  This  may  do — maun  do — Sir,  wie  them  wha 
Maun  please  the  great  folk  for  a  wamefou." 

*  Whitney,  "  Essentials  of  English  Grammar,"  p.  120. 


43 6  English  Grammar, 

Another  very  old  expression  is  formed  by  combining  the 
verb  to  be  with  an  infinitive.  We  find  such  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  : 

**  Sende  thone  the  thu  to  sendene  eart" 
(Send  him  whom  thou  art  to  send.) 

ExoD.  iv.,  13. 

"  Se  the  to  cumenne  is  sefter  me  vses  beforan  me." 
(He  that  is  to  come  after  me  was  before  me.) 

John  i.,  15. 

This  is  still  good  English,  and  we  may  expect  any  day  to 
hear  that  "  there  is  to  be  a  great  wedding,  and  we  all  are  to 
be  invited,  and  the  Bishop  is  to  officiate^'  and  a  great  many 
other  things  are  to  be. 

"  We  are  going  to  build  a  new  church."  A  phrase  of  this 
kind  is  now  the  most  common  expression  for  the  immediate 
future.  "  We  shall  build''  is  quite  indefinite  as  to  time,  but 
the  other  form  promises  prompt,  or  quite  early,  action.  Ac- 
cording to  Kington  Oliphant  it  first  appeared  in  its  present 
form  in  the  "  Revelations  of  the  Monk  of  Evesham,"  about 
1470,*  and  so  has  been  in  use  a  little  over  four  hundred 
years.  Phrases  very  similar  are  still  older,  and  no  doubt 
took  their  origin  from  an  actual  going  with  intent  to  do 
something.  They  seem  to  have  come  from  the  French,  who 
have  the  two  corresponding  expressions, 

Je  vais  ecrire  une  lettre 
(I  go  to  write  a  letter) 
and 

Je  viens  d'ecrire  une  lettre 

(I  come  from  writing  a  letter). 

That  is,  I  have  just  written  one.  We  have  not  yet  adopted 
this  last,  nor  quite  naturalized  the  excellent  Hibernianism  : 
"  I  '11  be  afther  writing." 

"  I  have  to  write  "  is  generally,  but  not  necessarily,  future. 
In  point  of  time  it  is  like  the  original  tense,  that  was  both 
present  and  future.     It  also  embodies  the  idea  of  necessity 

*  "New  English,"  ii.,  322. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  437 

expressed  by  must.  Lastly,  there  is  the  present  tense  used 
as  a  future  : 

I  will  write  I  will  be  writing 

I  shall  write  I  shall  be  writing 

I  am  to  write  I  am  to  be  writing 

I  am  going  to  write  I  am  going  to  be  writing 

I  have  to  write  I  have  to  be  writing 

How  many  future  tenses  are  here  ?  one  ?  or  two  ?  or 
ten  ?  Reader,  count  for  yourself.  There  are  certainly  ten 
ways  of  expressing  future  action,  all  differing  in  form  and 
slightly  in  effect,  except  that  between  "I  will"  and  "I 
shall"  there  is  no  difference  in  value.  But  do  they  form 
ten  tenses  ?  or  half  the  number  ?  or  what  number  ?  If  we 
call  them  ten  and  invent  ten  names  for  them,  we  shall  not 
understand  our  language  the  better,  nor  use  it  any  better. 
There  are  but  two  elements  of  difference — difference  of  form 
and  difference  of  signification  or  application.  But  then  two 
questions  arise — how  much  difference  in  either  is  required  to 
make  a  grammatical  distinction  ?  and  what  are  we  to  do 
when  difference  of  form  is  united  with  identity  of  applica- 
tion, or  identity  of  form  with  diversity  of  application  ?  The 
older  grammarians  attached  most  importance  to  the  aggre- 
gate value  of  whole  phrases  ;  the  latter  dwell  more  on  the 
history  and  form  of  single  words.  But  consistency  is  not 
common  with  either — is  probably  impossible.  To  implore 
and  to  command — "  forgive  us  our  trespasses,"  and  "  forward 
march  !  " — represent  attitudes  of  the  speaker  as  opposite  as 
the  poles,  yet  both  verbs  are  said  to  be  imperative,  which 
means  commanding.  How  different  is  it  to  ask  a  question 
and  to  make  an  assertion ;  yet  that  difference  is  rarely  made 
a  grammatical  distinction.  The  imperative  and  the  simpler 
form  of  the  infinitive  are  always  alike,  yet  grammarians 
make  two  different  modes  of  sing  in  the  following  sentence : 
"  Please  sing  us  that  song  I  have  often  heard  you  sing." 
Some  go  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  the  last  is  not  a  verb  at 
all  but  a  noun.  Indeed  the  rules  of  English  grammar  are 
not  a  consistent  body  of  doctrine  framed  during  the  six  days 


43 8  English  Grammar. 

of  creation,  and  unchanged  ever  since,  but  a  compromising 
and  inconsistent  patchwork.  It  may  well  be  doubted  if  any 
two  could  state  them  alike  beyond  the  merest  outlines, 
except  in  so  far  as  they  copied.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that 
children  of  tender  years  have  so  often  been  taught,  as  their 
life-guidance,  a  mass  of  stuff  that  they  could  not  compre- 
hend, and  on  which  the  learned  could  not  agree. 

Future-perfect. — The  future-perfect  represents  a  fu- 
ture action  preceding  some  other  future  action  or  event.  It 
was  no  doubt  applied  at  first  to  actions  expected  to  be  com- 
pleted or  ended  before  a  certain  time,  but  when  it  is  made 
up  with  the  continuing  participle  in  -ing,  as 

By  the  end  of  June  he  will  have  been  studying  German  six  months, 

the  termination  of  the  action  is  not  implied.  The  simplest 
form  of  this  tense  is  like  the  following : 

The  sun  will  have  set  before  we  reach  home. 

"  Before  this  time  to-morrow  I  shall  have  gained  a  peerage  or 
Westminster  Abbey." — Southey  :  "Life  of  Nelson." 

A  sentence  containing  a  future-perfect  tense,  when  fully 
expressed,  consists  of  two  parts.  There  is  the  principal  or 
direct  part  of  the  sentence,  and  a  defining  clause  indicating 
the  time.  In  the  example  above,  "  The  sun  will  have  set " 
is  the  main  or  direct  statement ;  "  before  we  reach  home," 
the  defining  clause.  The  future-perfect  should  rarely,  if 
ever,  be  used  in  the  latter,  and  may  often  be  omitted  in  the 
former.     It  is  just  as  well  to  say  : 

The  sun  will  set  before  we  reach  home.  The  defining 
clause  may  not  contain  a  verb,  in  which  case  there  is  no 
question  about  the  tense  in  that  part. 

We  shall  then  have  walked  five  miles. 

Here  the  defining  clause  is  reduced  to  the  single  word  then. 
The    future-perfect    is    a    cumbrous    expression,   to    be 
avoided  whenever  possible,  which  can  be  done  in  several 
ways. 
First.  We  may  use  the  present  tense : 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  439 

"  which  may  yet  be  established  *  *  *  when  this  com- 
parison shall  have  been  made  with  sufficient  knowledge." 

Whitney  ;  *'  Language,"  etc. 

"  We  shall  be  obliged  to  hold  our  judgments  suspended  until 
the  general  relations  of  the  north-eastern  Asiatic  languages  are 
better  settled." — Id. 

In  my  judgment  the  latter  example  is  much  to  be  preferred. 

"  Until  this  transfer  is  effected,  a  guard  of  one  officer  and  ten 
enlisted  men  will  be  left  at  the  post." 

Hd.  Qrs.,  Dept.  of  Dakota,  April  8,  1891. 

Second.  The  perfect  tense  may  b^  used  : 

"  The  system  of  records  *  *  *  will  be  commenced  Janu- 
ary, I,  1890.  When  an  error  or  mistake  is  discovered.  *  *  * 
After  the  system  has  gone  into  operation  the  inspector  of  records 
in  the  performance  of  his  duty,  will  report  whenever  he  ascer- 
tains" etc. — "Order  of  the  War  Depart.,  Nov.  2,  1889." 

Third.  We  may  use  the  future,  as  in  example  above : 

"  The  sun  will  set "  etc. 

"  I  will  not  drink  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  the  kingdom  of 
God  shall  come." — Luke  xxii.,  18. 

Fourth.  Sometimes,  but  rarely,  w^e  find  the  preterit : 

"And  to  every  male  citizen,  whether  refugee  or  freedman  as 
aforesaid,  there  shall  be  assigned  not  more  than  forty  acres  of 
such  land,  and  the  person  to  whom  it  was  so  assigned  shall  be 
protected  in  the  use  and  enjoyment  of  the  land." 

"  U.  S.  Statutes,"  15,  508. 

The  following  short  example  illustrates  various  ways  of 
representing  the  same  future  event.  It  is  the  last  part  of 
John  xiii.,  38  in  successive  versions :  Gothic,  Anglo-Saxon, 
Wycliffe,  Tyndale,  and  the  authorized  version,  with  which 
the  new  revision  is  identical. 

"Amen,  amen,  qitha  thus,  thei  hana  ni  hrukeith  unte  thu  mik 
a/a/-^/j  kunnan  thrim  sintham." 

(Transl.)  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  the  cock  croweth  not 
until  thou  deniest  knowing  me  three  times. 


440  English  Grammar, 

"  Soth  ic  the  secge,  ne  craweth  se  cocc,  ser  thii  with-secgsi  me 
thriwa." 

(Transl.)  In  sooth  I  say  to  thee,  the  cock  croweth  not  ere  thou 
deniest  me  thries. 

"  Treuli,  treuli,  I  seie  to  thee,  the  koc  sckall  not  crowe  till 
thou  schalt  denye  me  thries." 

"  Verely,  verely,  I  saye  vnto  thee,  the  cock  shall  not  cro7ve^  till 
thou  have  denyed  me  thryse." 

"  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  The  cock  shall  not  crow  till 
thou  hast  denied  me  thrice." 

As  both  the  perfect  and  the  future  are  relatively  late  in 
the  Teutonic  family  of  languages,  we  may  well  believe  that 
the  future-perfect  is  the  youngest  of  all  the  tenses.  Yet 
it  is  found  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury in  line  151  of  the  "  Ormulum." 

"  &  3iff  the33  all  forwerrthenn  itt, 
Itt  turrnethth  hemm  till  sinne  ; 
&  I  shall  hafenn  addledd  me 
The  Laferrd  Cristess  are." 
(And  if  they  all  reject  it, 
It  turneth  to  them  for  sin  ; 
And  I  shall  have  earned  me 
The  Lord  Christ's  wrath.) 

MOODS. 

I  have  met  with  no  satisfactory  definition  of  mood  or 
mode  in  grammar,  and  am  unable  to  give  one.  But  before 
attempting  even  an  approximate  account  of  the  thing  it 
may  be  well  to  determine  the  name  we  shall  call  it  by.  The 
word  that  has  been  most  commonly  and  constantly  used, 
especially  in  England  is  mood,  while  late  American  writers 
give  the  preference  to  mode.  This  seems  to  come  from  a 
desire  to  distinguish  it  from  the  quite  different  word  mood, 
a  state  of  the  mind,  with  which  it  has  no  connection.  The 
grammatical  term  is  derived  from  the  Latin  word  modus, 
measure  or  manner,  from  which  we  have  many  words — 
tnode,  moderate,  modest,  accommodate,  and  others.     It  occurs 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs,  441 

in  both  forms,  mood  and  mode,  and  as  a  grammatical  term  is 
quite  as  technical  and  special  as  tense.  In  the  form  m,ode 
the  word  is  employed  in  logic  to  denote  certain  differences 
among  propositions,  which  is  one  reason  for  calling  the 
grammatical  term  mood. 

The  several  moods  are  different  ways  in  which  the  speaker 
regards  the  action  of  which  he  speaks,  as  related  to  himself. 
That  will  not  make  a  definition,  for  it  may  be  true  of  other 
distinctions.  Still  it  is  true  so  far  as  it  goes.  Take  first 
the  distinction  of  number  ;  second  the  distinction  of  person, 
heretofore  explained  ;  third,  the  distinction  of  tense  or  time; 
fourth,  the  distinction  of  active  and  passive — of  acting  and 
being  acted  upon, — then  all  other  variations  in  the  form  and 
construction  of  our  verbs  are  distinctions  of  7nood.  The 
speaker  may  regard  the  action  as  a  fact  within  his  knowledge. 

The  ship  has  sailed. 

He  may  regard  it  as  a  thing  unknown  to  him,  but  which  he 

desires  to  know : 

Has  the  ship  sailed? 

It  may  be  uncertain  and  a  condition  on  which  something 
else  depends : 

If  the  ship  have  sailed. 

It  may  be  uncertain  depending  on  another  uncertainty : 

If  the  wind  be  fair,  the  ship  may  sail. 
It  may  be  a  thing  wished  for : 

O  that  the  ship  would  sail. 
The  speaker  may  command  the  action  : 

Sail  the  ship. 
He  may  treat  it  as  an  adjective  or  quality  : 

He  preferred  a  sailing  ship  to  a  steamer  ; 
or  as  an  entity  or  thing  : 

Contrary  winds  delayed  the  sailing  of  the  ship. 

Or  he  may  strip  the  action  of  all  these  and  show  it  in  primi- 
tive nakedness : 

A  freshening  breeze  soon  made  the  ship  sail. 


442  English  Grammar. 

These  may  not  be  generally  called  moods,  but  they  illus- 
trate the  kind  of  distinctions  to  which  the  term  is  applicable. 
There  is  no  precise  limit  to  their  number.  One  authority 
very  justly  says  :  "  As  the  whole  order  of  the  variation  of 
words  in  the  conjugation  of  a  verb  is  merely  arbitrary,  those 
who  invent  them  may  arrange  them  into  what  order  they 
please  and  call  them  by  what  names  they  may  think  most 
proper.  But,  however  they  may  vary  the  names  or  external 
arrangement,  this  does  not  affect  the  things  themselves." 
That  is,  such  examples  as  those  above  given  exist  in  our 
language  and  are  beyond  individual  control ;  but  any  one 
may  classify  them  as  he  pleases.  The  same  writer  suggests 
as  names  of  moods  :  Declarative  or  Indicative,  the  Potential, 
the  Elective,  the  Determinative,  the  Compulsive,  the  Obliga- 
tive,  the  Subjunctive,  the  Optative,  the  Imperative,  the  Re- 
quisitive,  the  Precative,  the  Interrogative,  and  the  Vocative ; ' 
and  perhaps  ingenuity  could  double  even  that  number.  I 
am  not  aware  that  any  one  has  seriously  worked  out  a  gram- 
mar with  anything  like  so  many  moods.  For  practical 
purposes  I  shall  confine  myself  to  the  number  now  acknowl- 
edged by  the  most  learned  expositors  of  the  English  lan- 
guage. Those  are  the  Indicative,  the  Subjunctive,  the  Im- 
perative, the  Injinitive,  and  Participle,  admitting  at  the  same 
time  that  both  the  number  and  the  names  are  quite  arbitrary 
and  might  easily  have  been  very  different. 

Indicative. — This  includes  all  simple  direct  assertions : 
"  The  sun  shines  "  /  "  The  day  was  warm  "  ;  "  They  marched 
all  night."  The  presence  of  the  negative  not  makes  no 
grammatical  difference  anywhere,  beyond  requiring  the  use 
of  do  with  an  infinitive  form  in  all  cases  except  with  the 
verbs  to  be,  to  have,  and  the  auxiliaries.  "  The  sun  did  not 
shine  "  /  "  The  day  was  not  warm  "  ;  "  They  did  not  march 
all  night."  But  this  change  of  arrangement  is  not  held  to 
alter  mood,  tense,  person,  or  number.  Under  the  indicative 
are  included  direct  questions,  which  in  like  manner  require 
the  auxiliary  do — "  Does  the  sun  shine  ?  "  Observe  that,  in 
assertions,  the  subject  or  agent  is  placed  first,  the  verb  next, 

'  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  2d  ed.,  article  "  Grammar." 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  443 

but  that  in  questions  the  order  is  reversed.  "  The  day  is 
warm."  "  Is  the  day  warm  ?  "  But  when  an  auxiliary  is 
used,  that  alone  is  placed  before  the  subject.  This  is  one 
reason  why  some  of  the  most  profound  grammarians  hold 
the  auxiliary  in  such  case  to  be  the  real  verb  ;  another  is 
that  it  alone  is  inflected  for  person,  number,  mood,  and 
tense.  There  are  two  ways  of  regarding  a  complex  ex- 
pression. It  may  be  taken  collectively  as  a  whole,  or  word 
by  word.     Language  here  finds  a  parallel  in  algebra,  where 

the  complex  expression  ^^  f±  ^  £.y  _|_  ♦A^  may  be  taken 

and  handled  as  a  unit,  or  regard  may  be  had  to  the  value  of 
each  single  character.  The  first  method  is  preferable  for 
some  purposes,  the  second  for  others. 

The  indicative  is  used  not  only  when  the  speaker  expresses 
his  own  convictions,  but  also  when  he  represents  the  thoughts 
and  words  of  others,  whether  correct  or  incorrect.  "  Who 
do  men  say  that  the  Son  of  man  is  f  "  *  *  *  "  But  who  say 
ye  that  I  am  f  "  * 

A  supposition  given  as  the  ground  of  some  other  proposi- 
tion takes  an  indicative  when  the  supposition  is  regarded  as 
a  fact  and  not  a  matter  of  doubt. 

"If  thou  accountedst  it  shame,  lay  it  on  me." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Taming  of  the  Shrew,"  iv.,  3. 
"  If  there  is  a  class  who,  in  contempt  of  its  follies  and  disgust 
at  its  corruptions,  have  contracted  towards  Religion  a  repugnance 
which  makes  them  overlook  the  fundamental  verity  contained  in 
it  ;  so  too,  is  there  a  class  offended  to  such  a  degree  by  the  de- 
structive criticisms  men  of  science  make  on  the  religious  tenets 
they  regard  as  essential,  that  they  have  acquired  a  strong  preju- 
dice against  Science  in  general." 

Herbert  Spencer  :  "  First  Principles,"  Chapter  i. 

The  above  examples  are  introduced  by  the  dubitative 
word  if,  but  suppositions  may  be  introduced  by  many  other 
words,  such  as  unless,  though,  whether,  whoever,  suppose. 

'  Matt,  xvi.,  13-16,  Revised  Version. 


444  English  Grammar, 

"  Shall  we  say  then  that  whether  it  consists  of  an  infinitely  divisi- 
ble element  or  of  ultimate  units  incapable  of  further  division,  its 
parts  are  everywhere  in  actual  contact  ? " 

Spencer's  "  First  Principles,"  Chap.  iii. 

The  doctrine  that  suppositions  take  the  indicative  only 
vv^hen  admitted  as  facts  is  more  applicable  to  the  language  as 
it  was  than  as  it  nov/  is  ;  for  this  mood  is  a  growing  and  ex- 
tending one,  not  limited  now  to  certainties,  but  used  in  say- 
ing many  things  that  were  formerly  expressed  otherwise. 

"  If  it  is  the  first  cause,  the  conclusion  is  reached.  If  it  is 
not  the  first  cause,  then  by  implication  there  must  be  a  cause  be- 
hind it ;  which  thus  becomes  the  real  cause  of  the  effect." 

Spencer's  "  First  Principles,"  Chap.  ii. 

The  writer  does  not  take  these  two  opposite  suppositions  to 
be  both  true,  but  both  in  doubt ;  and  had  he  lived  a  century 
earlier  would  probably  have  written  be  instead  of  is. 

In  regard  to  forms,  the  indicative  can  scarcely  be  said  to 
have  any  determined  by  the  mood ;  certainly  none  unless  it 
be  in  the  anomalous  verb  to  be.  Its  variations  are  deter- 
mined by  person,  number,  and  tense ;  not  by  mood  ;  and  of 
these  variations  it  preserves  by  far  the  largest  remains.  Of 
every  verb — always  excepting  the  verb  to  be — there  is  one 
simplest  form,  as,  for  example,  go.  This  might  be  called  the 
ground  form^  but  it  is  found  alike  in  all  moods,  not  including 
the  participle,  unless  changed  for  person,  number,  or  tense. 

Subjunctive. — Statements,  assertions,  predications,  as 
they  are  variously  called,  are  not  all  put  forth  as  positive 
facts ;  but  many  of  them  are  uttered  hesitatingly  as  being 
suppositions,  conditioned,  or  conditional.  From  the  earliest 
ages  that  we  know  of  certain  forms  of  the  verb  have  been 
assigned  to  these  timid  hesitating  utterances.  But  as  the  hesi- 
tancy is  of  all  degrees,  and  due  to  a  great  variety  of  causes, 
it  has  been  found  difficult  or  impossible  to  keep  these  dubi- 
tative  forms  of  the  verb  clearly  distinguished  in  form  and 
application.  In  Sanskrit  they  are  in  a  state  of  great  confu- 
sion ;  in  Greek  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  difference  between 
subjunctive  and  optative  be  one  of  mood  or  of  tense ;  Latin 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs. 


445 


has  but  one  of  these  doubtful  divisions,  but  the  student 
knows  that  it  covers  a  wide  field,  whose  boundaries  are  hard 
to  trace.  In  English  it  is  the  central  difficulty  of  the  lan- 
guage— not  the  less  difficult  that  only  vestiges  of  it  remain. 
It  is  often  impossible  to  tell  at  present  whether  a  verb  in  a 
given  case  be  indicative  or  subjunctive.  It  rarely  has  a 
separate  or  special  form  of  its  own.  That  this  was  not  so  in 
the  earlier  ages  of  the  language  will  appear  on  comparing  the 
Gothic,  Anglo-Saxon,  and  English  of  the  verb  find. 

PRESENT    INDICATIVE 


I  Pers. 

Sing. 

finth-a 

find-e 

find 

2        " 

« 

finth-is 

find-est 

find-est 

3      " 

« 

finth-ith 

find-eth 

find-s 

I      *' 

Plu. 

finth-am 

find-ath 

find 

2        " 

« 

finth-ith 

find-ath 

find 

3      " 

{ 

finth-and 

find-ath 

find 

PRETERIT    INDICATIVE. 

I  Pers. 

Sing. 

fanth 

fand 

found 

2       " 

(( 

fanst 

fand-e 

found-est 

3      " 

<< 

fanth 

fand 

found 

I      " 

Plu. 

fanth-um 

fand 

found 

2        " 

n 

fanth-uth 

fund-e 

found 

3      " 

u 

fanth-un 

fand 

found 

PRESENT    SUBJUNCTIVE 

I  Pers.  Sing.  finth-au 


Plu. 


finth-ais 

finth-ai 

finth-aima 

finth-aith 

finth-aina 


find-e 


find-en 


{►find 


PRETERIT   SUBJUNCTIVE. 


I  Per,  Sing,   funth-jau 


"        funth-eis 

funth-i 
Plu.    funth-eima 
"        funth-eith 
**        funth-eina 


funde 


fund-en 


.  found 


44^  English  Grammar. 

The  reader  will  not  fail  to  notice  the  lengthening  of  the 
subjunctive  vowels  in  Gothic,  a  feature  common  to  that 
language,  Greek,  and  Sanskrit.  On  this  peculiarity  Professor 
Ernst  Curtius  remarks : 

"  The  lengthening  of  the  sound  between  the  root  and  the  per- 
sonal ending  naturally  and  meaningly  distinguishes  the  hesitating 
and  conditional  statement  from  the  unconditional."  ' 

It  will  also  be  seen  by  the  Anglo-Saxon  column  that  in 
course  of  five  or  six  hundred  years  the  six  original  forms 
had  become  reduced  to  two  ;  and  that  in  another  equal 
period  there  remained  in  English  only  one.  Moreover,  in 
the  perterit  tense  that  one  is  derived  from  the  plural  of  the 
past  indicative,  never  from  the  singular.  In  English,  with 
one  exception,  the  preterit  subjunctive  is  identical  with 
the  preterit  indicative.  But  in  that  exceptional  instance,  in 
which  there  are  separate  forms  for  singular  and  plural  in  the 
past  indicative,  the  past  subjunctive  adopts  the  plural.  We 
say :  /  zvas,  he  was,  we  were,  they  were,  but  if  I  were,  if  he 
were,  if  they  were.  The  second  person  singular  is  excep- 
tional and  peculiar,  and  offers  the  sole  example  in  the  lan- 
guage of  a  form  found  only  in  the  subjunctive.  Indie,  thou 
wast,  subj.  if  thou  wert,  which  also  is  allied  to  the  plurals. 

In  point  of  form  the  subjunctive  is  the  perfection  of  sim- 
plicity ;  the  intricacy  is  all  in  using  it.  The  first  peculiarity 
that  I  shall  mention  is  a  shifting — verschiebung  as  the  Ger- 
mans call  it — of  the  tenses.  The  present  is  not  so  much  a 
present  as  a  future ;  what  has  been  called  the  preterit  is 
present  in  effect ;  and  what  is  pluperfect  in  form  is  simply 
past  or  preterit  in  its  application.  In  the  following  illus- 
tration let  the  words,  yesterday,  etc.,  show  the  real  time. 

Before  yesterday      Yesterday  To-day  To-morrow 

Ind.  It  had  rained    It  rained  It  rains  It  will  rain 

Sub.  If  it  had  rained   If  it  rained      If  it  rain 

These  expressions  may  be  further  expanded. 

If  it  had  rained  yesterday,  there  would  be  less  dust  now. 

If  it  rained  now  we  should  get  wet. 

If  it  rain  to-morrow,  we  will  stay  indoors. 

*  "  Histoiy  of  Greece,"  Chap.  i. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  447 

It  is  not  necessary  to  say :  "  If  it  should  rain  "  ;  for,  "  If 
it  rain,"  serves  the  purpose  quite  as  well ;  and  it  would  be 
impossible  to  say  whether  the  longer  expression  were  in- 
dicative or  subjunctive.  Expressions  like  :  "  If  he  shall," 
"  If  it  shall,"  are  admissible,  and  often  met  with  ;  but  I  can- 
not think  of  a  case  where  they  are  necessary.  On  the  other 
hand,  "If  he  will"  does  serve  a  useful  purpose,  as:  "We 
will  give  him  an  equal  share  in  the  venture,  if  he  will  z.zzQ'pt 
it."  But  in  such  case  will  retains  its  sense  of  the  volition — 
"  if  he  be  willing  to  accept  it."  Then  turning  the  sentence 
and  stretching  the  analogy,  we  still  retain  the  will,  saying ; 
"  We  will  give  him  an  equal  share  with  ourselves,  if  that 
will  please  him."  Stretching  the  analogy  still  farther  and 
beyond  the  limit  of  intelligent  volition,  we  go  on  to  say  such 
things  as  this  :  "  Immerse  these  eggs  in  melted  paraffine, 
and  see  if  that  will  preserve  them."  In  fact  we  employ 
the  word  wherever  there  is  a  desirable  purpose  of  doubtful 
attainment.  We  cannot  be  sure  in  such  cases  whether  will 
is  indicative  or  subjunctive. 

I  have  said  that  in  the  subjunctive  the  tense  that  is  pres- 
ent in  form  is  generally  future  in  its  reference,  but  even  the 
apparently  past  but  really  present  tense  is  often  shifted  so 
far  that  its  reference  is  future.  We  may  inquire  of  one 
going  out  in  a  boat :  "  What  would  you  do  if  a  storm 
arose  ?  " 

"  To  turn  the  rein  were  sin  and  shame, 

To  fight  were  deadly  peril ; 
What  would  you  do  now,  Roland  Cheyne, 

Were  ye  Glenallan's  Earl  ? " 

Scott  :  "  The  Antiquary,"  Chap.  40. 

It  would  be  more  in  accordance  with  modern  usage  to 
say  in  the  above  samples  ;  "  should  arise  "  and  "  would  be  "  ; 
but  such  a  change  would  not  alter  mood,  tense,  or  sense. 
It  would  be  merely  substituting  a  compound  verbal  expres- 
sion for  a  simple  one.  In  complex  verbal  expressions  it  is 
only  the  auxiliary  that  is  varied  to  distinguish  mood,  tense, 
person,  or  number.  Of  these  have  and  be  are  followed  by 
the  participle  ;  the  others  take  the  infinitive. 

I  will  sing,  thou  didst  sing,  they  might  sing. 


448  English  Grammar. 

I  am  surprised  ;  thou  mightest  have  been  surprised ;  they  will  be 
surprised. 

This  circumstance  goes  to  confirm  the  view  of  those  who 
hold  that,  so  far  as  grammar  goes,  the  auxiliary  is,  in  these 
cases,  the  real  verb.  It  is  also  inconsistent  with  the  exist- 
ence of  a  separate  mood  that  used  to  be  called  the  potential ; 
that  is  the  mood  which  expressed  possibilities.  It  was  made 
by  the  aid  of  several  auxiliaries — may,  can,  and  sometimes 
must,  will,  and  shall.  It  was  never  claimed  that  "  I  shall 
write  "  belonged  to  this  mood.  That  was  called  future  in- 
dicative ;  but  *'  I  should  write  "  was  so  claimed.  In  a  pre- 
tentious grammar  now  before  me  that  is  called  the  past  tense 
of  the  potential  mode ;  but  it  is  not  a  past  tense,  in  fact, 
and  never  relates  to  past  time. 

"  If  I  ^a^pen,  ink,  and  paper,  I  should  write  now." 

Had  is  here  the  past  subjunctive  of  have,  should  is  the 
same  of  shall,  but,  as  already  shown,  past  subjunctives  refer 
to  the  present  or  the  future.  May  was  held  to  be  the  typi- 
cal sign  of  the  potential  mood,  but  might  is  the  past  sub- 
junctive oi-may.  If,  then,  "I  may  write"  were  present 
potential,  "I  might  write"  would  be  the  subjunctive  mood 
of  the  potential  mood,  which  I  suppose  no  one  claims. 

The  field  occupied  by  the  subjunctive  is  so  large  and  ir- 
regular that  it  is  difficult  to  define  its  limits  or  designate  its 
several  portions.  The  problem  is  complicated  by  the  fact 
that  such  occupancy  is  only  a  kind  of  tenancy  in  common, 
there  are  so  many  cases  in  which  some  other  mood  might  be 
put  in  its  place.  In  the  examples  which  are  now  to  follow 
I  shall  give  under  each  subdivision  those  that  contain  a  sub- 
junctive, and  then  per  contra  others  of  the  same  character, 
except  that  a  different  mood  is  used. 

The  subjunctive  is  used  in  expressing  suppositions  and 
results  depending  on  supposed  conditions.  A  conditional 
sentence  may  be  roughly  defined  as  a  sentence  whereof  one 
half  is  a  condition  on  which  the  other  half  depends.  Take 
this  as  a  typical  example : 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  449 

**  If  Mr,  Serious,  the  clergyman,  calls,  say  I  am  gone  to  the 
great  meeting  at  Exeter  Hall." — Bulwer  :  "  Money,"  3,  2. 

The  call  by  Mr.  Serious  is  the  condition  on  which  the  answer 
depends.  If  he  call,  he  is  to  be  answered  as  directed  ;  if  he 
call  not,  there  can  be  no  answer.  Such  a  supposition,  while 
still  retaining  the  same  words,  may  take  three  different  forms 
grammatically,  thus:  If  it  rains.  If  it  rain,  If  it  rained  {ox 
should  rain).  The  first  is  indicative  present,  and  admits  the 
supposition  as  correct.  The  second  is  subjunctive  present, 
with  usually  a  future  reference,  and  indicates  a  mental  atti- 
tude of  unbiassed  uncertainty.  The  third  is  preterit  subjunc- 
tive, but  never  referring  to  past  time,  and  means  that  the 
supposition  is  untenable.  The  words  might  indeed  be 
preterit  indicative.  That  is  only  to  be  determined  by  the 
sense  of  the  context.  These  three  kinds  of  suppositions 
may  be  further  illustrated  by  adding  to  each,  in  brackets, 
the  remainder  of  a  suitable  sentence. 

If  it  rains  (or  is  raining)  [as  you  say  it  is,  we  had  better  stay 
in]. 

If  it  rain  [to-morrow,  which  we  have  no  means  of  knowing,  it 
will  be  bad  for  the  meeting  in  the  grove]. 

If  it  rained  (or  were  raining)  [the  dust  would  not  be  flying,  as 
you  see  it  is]. 

The  second  is  very  generally  followed  by  a  future  in  the 
apodosis,  and  the  third  by  the  same  mood  and  tense  which 
is  in  the  protasis. 

Again  I  may  remind  the  reader  that  writers  and  speakers 
have  been  unable  or  unwilling  to  adhere  to  any  precise  rule 
on  the  subject. 

"  It  is  one  of  the  best  bonds,  bothe  of  chastity  and  obedience 
in  the  wife,  if  she  think  her  husband  wise,  which  she  will  never 
do  if  she  findYixta.  jealous." — Bacon  :  **  Essay"  viii. 

"  she  deserts  thee  not  if  thou 
Dismiss  not  her,  when  most  thou  needst  her  nigh," 

"  Paradise  Lost,"  8,  563. 


450  English  Gramma}'. 

"  But  //  no  faithless  action  stain 
Thy  love  and  constant  word, 
I  '11  make  thee  famous  by  my  pen, 
And  glorious  by  my  sword." 

Marquis  of  Montrose. 
"  If  solitude  succeed  to  grief, 
Release  from  pain  is  slight  relief." 

Byron  :  "  Giaour." 

/^  If  it  were  done,  when  't  is  done  then  7  were  well 
It  were  done  quickly." — Shakesp.:  "  Macbeth,"  i,  7. 
"  If  it  were  so, 
There  now  would  be  no  Venice." 

Byron  :  "  The  Two  Foscari." 

"  Were  matter  thus  absolutely  solid,  it  would  be  what  it  is  not — 
absolutely  incompressible." 

Spencer  :  **  First  Principles,"  Chap.  iii. 

Afid,  generally  written  an  ,  and  having  the  value  of  if,  was 
quite  common  in  Middle  English. 

**  Now  well  were  I  an  it  so  were." 

**  Townley  Mysteries." 

Hence  it  was  said  : 

"  If  if's  and  an's  were  pots  and  pans, 
There  V  be  no  need  of  tinkers." 

It  is  now  confined  to  poetry  and  some  provincial  dialects. 

^^An  V  were  not  for  thy  hoary  beard. 
Such  hand  as  Marmion's  had  not  spared 
To  cleave  the  Douglas  dead." 

Scott  ;  "  Marmion,"  Canto  6. 

If  is  often  omitted,  especially  in  poetry,  before  have,  be, 
and  the  auxiliaries.  The  verb  is  then  placed  before  its  sub- 
ject. 

I  "  were  I  quiet  earth, 

That  were  no  evil." 

Byron  :  "  Cain." 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  451 

"  Society,  friendship,  and  love, 
Divinely  bestowed  upon  man  ; 
O,  had  I  the  wings  of  a  dove, 

How  soon  would  I  taste  you  again  ! " 

CowpER  :  "  Selkirk." 

"  And  should  my  youth,  as  youth  is  apt,  I  know, 
Some  harshness  show, 
All  vain  asperities,  I,  day  by  day, 
Would  wear  away." 

SouTHEY  :  "  Holly  Tree." 

Although  the  most  common,  if  is  not  the  only  word  used 
to  introduce  a  supposition.  There  are  many  others,  among 
w^hich  are,  although,  unless,  except,  provided,  admit,  grant,  sup- 
pose, so,  whether.  Many  of  these  may  also  take  the  conjunc- 
tion that  after  them.  Sometimes  there  is  no  special  formula. 
The  choice  between  indicative  and  subjunctive  depends 
essentially  on  the  question  whether  we  conceive  ourselve 
to  be  dealing  with  a  fact  or  with  a  supposed  possibility. 

"  Though  he  heap  up  silver  as  the  clay,  and  prepare  raiment  as 
the  dust."  Job  xxvii.,  16. 

"  And  oft  though  Wisdom  wake,  Suspicion  sleeps 
At  Wisdom's  gate." 

"  Paradise  Lost,"  iii.,  686. 

"  And  he  said,  Whether  they  be  come  out  for  peace  take  them 
alive  ;  or  whether  they  be  come  out  for  war,  take  them  alive." 

I  Kings  xx.,  18. 

"  Whether  he  spin  poor  couplets  into  plays, 
Or  damn  the  dead  with  purgatorial  praise, 
His  style  in  youth  or  age  is  still  the  same." 

Byron  :  "  English  Bards." 

"  Whether  this  be  or  be  not  implied." 

J.  S.  Mill  :  "  Logic,"  Chap.  8. 

"  The  soul  which  hath  touched  any  such  *  *  *  shall  not 
eat  of  the  holy  things,  unless  he  wash  his  flesh  with  water." 

Levit.  xxii.,  6. 


452  English  Grammar. 

"  The  events     *     *     *     must  be  very  imperfectly  understood 
unless  the  plot  of  the  preceding  acts  be  well  understood." 

Macaulay  :  "  Hist,  of  Eng.,"  Chap.  i. 

"  Except  thou  take  away  the  blind  and  the  lame,  thou  shalt  not 
come  in  hither."  2  Samuel  v.,  6. 

"  And  this  will  I  venture  my  poor  gentleman-like  carcase  to 
perform, /r^TZ'/V/iJi/ there  be  no  treason  practised  upon  us." 

Ben  Jonson  :  "  Every  Man  in  his  Hum.,"  iv.,  5. 

*^ Suppose  7  were  Fortius,  could  you  blame  my  choice  ? " 

Addison  :  "  Cato,"  i.,  6. 

"  Or  suppose  Bishop  Philpotts  requested  it  of  him  as  a  favor." 

Leigh  Hunt  :  "  Table  Talk." 

"  Perhaps  it  had  been  better  to  stand  by  mere  Prussian  and 
German  merit,  native  to  the  soil." 

Carlyle  :  "  Fred'k  the  Great." 

"  So  I  were  out  of  prison  and  kept  Sheepe, 
I  should  be  as  merry  as  the  day  is  long." 

Shakesp.:  "  King  John,"  iv.,  2. 

**  Why  (Cosine)  were  thou  Regent  of  the  world, 
It  were  a  shame  to  let  this  land  by  lease." 

Shakesp.:  "  Richard  II.,"  ii.,  2. 

"  Be  it  scroll  or  be  it  book. 
Into  it,  knight,  thou  must  not  look." 

Scott. 

But  per  contra. 

"  If  thou  more  murmur' st,  I  will  rend  an  Oake 
And  peg  thee  in  his  knotty  entrailes." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Tempest,"  i.,  2. 

"And  //"thou  loiterest  longer,  all  will  fall  away." 

Coleridge:  " Piccol.," i.,  10. 

"  Oh  !  if  your  tears  are  given  to  care, 
'  If  real  woe  disturbs  your  peace, 

j        Come  to  my  bosom."  Thomas  Moore. 

"  I  suppose  you  would  aim  at  him  best  of  all  //"he  was  out  of 
sight.'  Sheridan  :  "  Rivals,"  v.,  2. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  453 

"  Dr.  Marshall  Hall  *  *  *  remarked  that  //  the  foot  of  a 
frog  was  pinched,  the  animal  withdrew  the  limb," 

London  Quarterly,  J  any.,  1855. 

"  The  business  of  the  pension  office  would  be  seriously  imped- 
ed, even  if  the  health  of  the  clerks  was  not  impaired." 

"Report  of  Postmaster  General,  Nov.  27,  1889." 

"  Except  thou  hadst  hasted  and  come  to  meet  me,  surely  there 
had  been  no  man  left  to  Nabal  by  the  morning  light." 

I  Sam.  XXV.,  34. 

*'  Unless  thou  hadst  spoken,  surely  then  in  the  morning  the 
people  had  gone  up  every  one  from  following  his  brother." 

2  Sam.  ii.,  27. 

^^Thogh  with  their  high  wrongs  I  am  strook  to  the  quick, 
Yet,  with  my  nobler  reason,  gainst  my  furie, 
Do  I  take  part." 

Shakesp.:  "  Tempest,"  v.,  i. 

*^Tho'  no  Exchecquer  it  commands,  'tis  wealth, 
And  tho'  it  wears  no  ribband,  't  is  renown," 

Young  :  "  Night  Thoughts,"  vi.,  337. 

"  Alike  in  ignorance,  his  reason  such, 
Whether  he  thinks  too  little  or  too  much." 

Pope  :  "  Essay  on  Man,"  ii.,  11. 

"  Whether  thy  muse  most  lamentably  tells 
What  merry  sounds  proceed  from  Oxford  bells, 
Or,  still  in  bells  delighting,  finds  a  friend 
In  every  chime  that  jingles  from  Ostend." 

Byron  :  "  English  Bards." 

"  The  mere  delight  in  combining  ideas  suffices  them  ;  provided 
the  deductions  are  logical,  they  seem  almost  indifferent  to  their 
truth."  G.  Lewes.' 

Indicative  and  subjunctive  may  be  found  in  the  same 
sentence. 

"  Whether  it  be  owing  to  such  poetical  associations  *  *  * 
or  whether  there  is,  as  it  were,  a  sympathetic  revival." 

Irving  :  "  Braceb ridge  Hall," 

'  Quoted  from  Matzner. 


454  English  Grammar, 

The  subjunctive  is  found  with  indefinite  pronouns  and 
adverbs  of  time,  place,  and  manner — whoever^  whatever, 
wherever,  whenever,  however,  etc. — when  there  is  an  element 
of  uncertainty  or  conjecture  in  the  clause. 

"  If  thou  pardon  whosoever /raj', 
More  sinnes  for  this  forgiueness  prosper  may." 

Shakesp.:  "  Richard  II.,"  v.,  3. 

"But  he  that  troubleth  you  shall  bear  his  judgment,  whosoever 
he  be" — Gal.  v.,  10. 

"  Drede  ay  God  where  so  thou  be." 

"  Townley  Mysteries." 

"He  hath  always  3  wifes  with  him,  where  that  ever  he  be." 

Sir  John  Maundeville. 

*^  Howe'er  the  world  go,  I  '11  make  sure  for  one." 

Marlowe  :  "  Jew  of  Malta,"  i.,  i. 

"  Whatsoever  plague,  whatsoever  sickness  there  be." 

2  Kings  viii.,  37. 

Closely  related  to  these  examples  are  indefinite  designa- 
tions of  time,  after  which  the  subjunctive  was  formerly  used 
much  more  than  it  is  now. 

**  Now  quiet  Soule,  depart  when  Heanen please." 

Shakesp.:  i  "  Henry  VI.,"  iii.,  2. 

"  Why,  at  any  time  when  it  please  you,  I  shall  be  ready  to  dis- 
course to  you  all  I  know." 

Ben  Jonson  :  "  Every  Man  in  his  Humour." 

**  before  the  cock  crow,  thou  shalt  deny  me  thrice." — Matt. 
xxvi.,  34. 

"  Ere  thou  goe,  give  up  thy  Staffe." 

Shakesp.:  2  "Henry  VI.,"  ii.,  3. 

"  I  saw,  alas  !  some  dread  event  impend. 
Ere  to  the  main  this  morning  sun  descend" 

Pope  :  "  Rape  of  the  Lock,"  i. 

"  What  billows,  what  gales  is  she  fated  to  prove, 
Ere  she  sleep  in  the  lee  of  the  land  that  I  love  !  " 

Tom  Moore. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  455 

"The  tree  will  wither  long  before  \tfall." 

Byron  :  "  Childe  Harold,"  iii.,  32. 

Per  contra. 

"  Therefore  thou  art  inexcusable,  O  man,  whosoever  thou  art 
that  judgest." — Romans  ii.,  i. 

"  The  Lord  thy  God  is  with  thee  whithersoever  thou  goest." 

Joshua  i.,  9. 

"  Who  ere  helps  thee,  't  is  thou  that  must  help  me." 

Shakesp.  :  I  "  Henry  VL,"  i.,  2. 

"  Who  euer  winSy  on  that  side  shall  I  lose." 

Shakesp.  :  "  King  John,"  ii.,  i. 

"  Finally,  brethren,  whatsoever  things  ar^tnie,  whatsoever  things 
are  honest,  whatsoever  things  are  pure,  whatsoever  things  are 
lovely,  whatsoever  things  are  of  good  report  *  *  *  think  on  these 
things." — Phil,  iv.,  8. 

A  considerable  number  of  adjectival  expressions,  like  it 
is  good,  well,  better,  fitting,  desirable  enough,  hard,  sad,  take 
after  the  conjunction  that,  a  subjunctive. 

"  It  is  good  for  a  man  that  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth." 

Lam.  iii.,  27. 

This  could  have  been  as  well  expressed  : 

"  It  is  good  for  a  man  to  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth," 

which  is  a  much  more  common  form  of  expression.  The 
subjunctive  here  takes  the  place  of  an  infinitive.  The  last 
half  of  the  sentence  might  be  regarded  collectively  as  a  sub- 
stantive ;  and  the  whole  might  take  this  form : 

Bearing  the  yoke  in  his  youth  is  good  for  a  man. 

Hence  this  use  of  the  subjunctive  might  be  said  to  be  as  a 
substitute  for  substantive  clauses. 

"  it  is  better  that  thou  succour  us  out  of  the  city." 

2  Sam.  xviii.,  3. 

"  is  \tfit  this  souldier  keepe  his  oath  ?  " 

Shakesp.  :  "  Henry  V.,"  iv.,  7. 


456  English  Grammar. 

"  Therefore  't  is  meet  Achilles  meet  not  Hector." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Troyl.  and  Cressida." 

"  In  such  a  time  as  this  it  is  not  meet 
That  every  nice  offence  should  meet  "his,  Comment." 

"  Julius  Caesar,"  iv.,  2. 

"  'T  is  better  that  the  Enemie  seeke  vs." 

Id.,  iv.,  3. 

"  'T  is  necessary  that  be  looked  into." 

Marlowe  :  "  Jew  of  Malta,"  i,,  2. 

The  subjunctive  is  largely  used  to  express  indirectly  the 
effect  of  causing  or  preventing.  Here  is  an  example  of  the 
direct  way  of  expressing  it.  "  And  he  straitly  charged  them 
to  tell  no  man." — Mark  v.,  43  ;  and  here  an  example  of  the 
indirect :  "  I  charge  you  *  -s^  *  that  ye  stir  not  up  nor 
awake  my  love  till  he  please." — Canticles  ii.,  7.  The  words 
of  causing  and  preventing  are  many  and  various,  including 
among  others  :  cause,  command,  provide,  see,  take  care,  beseech, 
entreat,  exhort,  forbid ;  to  which  maybe  added  any  words 
of  hindering  or  fearing  followed  by  lest.  In  the  expressions 
now  under  consideration  the  verb  is  usually  followed  by  that 
or  lest,  but  that  is  sometimes  omitted  for  sake  of  brevity. 

"  he  spake  and  commanded  that  they  should  heat  the  furnace." 

Daniel  iii.,  19. 

"  He  commandeth  *  *  *  that  they  return  from  iniquity." 

Job  xxxvi.,  to. 

"  Beware  that  \\\ow pass  not  such  a  place." 

2  Kings  ii.,  9. 

^^  Beware  lest  Hezekiah. persuade  you." — Isaiah  xxxvi.,  18. 

"  Then  give  me  leave,  that  I  may  turne  the  key, 
That  no  one  enter,  till  my  tale  be  done." 

Shakesp.  ;  "  Richard  II.,"  iv.,  3. 

The  subjunctive  is  used  to  express  very  earnest  wish  or 
desire : 

"  O  that  I  were  as  in  months  past,  as  in  the  days  when  God 
preserved  me." — Job  xxix.,  3. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs,  457 

"  In  the  morning  thou  shalt  say,  Would  God  it  were  even  !  and 
in  the  even  thou  shalt  say,  Would  God  it  were  morning  I  " 

Deut.  xxviii.,  67. 

"  Oh,  that  I  were  a  Mockerie  King  of  Snow, 
Standing  before  the  Sunne  of  Bullingbrooke, 
To  melt  my  selfe  away  in  Water-drops." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Richard  II.,"  iv.,  i. 

**  Would  thou  wert  cleane  enough 
To  spit  upon." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Timon  of  Athens." 

Per  contra. 

"  I  wish  from  the  bottom  of  my  heart,  this  unnatural  struggle 
was  over." — Cooper  :  "  Spy,"  i. 

The  subjunctive  mood  is  becoming  less  used  than  for- 
merly, and  may  in  time  pass  away  entirely,  like  so  much  of 
the  inflectional  system  that  once  belonged  to  the  language. 
As  an  illustration  of  the  change  that  is  going  on,  I  observe 
that  the  recent  revisors  of  the  New  Testament  have  turned 
23  subjunctives  into  indicatives  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
alone,  omitting  the  considerable  number  not  easily  distin- 
guished. 

Imperative. — The  imperative  is  so  named  from  its  fre- 
quent use  in  direct  commands.  But,  as  the  form  of  expres- 
sion is  the  same,  the  name  is  extended  to  requests  and 
prayers,  even  the  most  humble — "  Forgive  me,  I  implore." 
As  to  its  form,  it  is  in  English,  merely  the  ground-form  of 
the  verb.  Hence  Dr.  Latham,  Dr.  Morris,  and  others  main- 
tain that  it  is  not  properly  a  mood,  as  it  has  no  peculiar 
form  to  itself.  The  imperative  addressed  to  a  single  person 
is  very  generally,  but  not  universally,  the  shortest  and 
simplest  form  that  the  verb  can  assume.  The  Latin  impera- 
tives, ij  es,  die,  fac,  fer,  are  familiar  examples.  Although 
reduced  to  its  lowest  terms  in  modern  English,  the  impera- 
tive had  once  a  goodly  array  of  endings  for  the  first,  second, 
and  third  persons,  singular,  dual,  and  plural  numbers ;  and 
it  furnishes  one  of  the  best  examples  of  the  gradual  dis- 
appearance of  inflections. 


458  English  Grammar. 


LATIN  FRENCH  GOTHIC  SAXON       ENGLISH 


I  vad-ani 


Sing.  \  2  vad-a  Xiy-t  leg-e  parl-e        qith  secg-e 

/  3  vad-a-tu      Xsy-E-zw        leg-i-to 


^ 


(  I  vad-ava 
Dual   j  2  vad-a-tam  Xiy-E-ran^  qith-aits  J  say 

(  3  vad-a-tam  XEy-e-roov  ' 

(  I  vad-ama  parl-ons    qith-am 

Plur.    \  2  vad-a-ta     Xey-E-re         leg-i-te      parl-ez      qith-ith    secg-ath  , 
(  3  vad-antu    Xsy-ov-Tcov  leg-unto  / 

The  plural  form  of  the  imperative,  ending  in  -a^k,  -eth,  or 
ith — for  the  vowel  was  quite  unstable — continued  down  to 
within  a  dozen  years  of  the  discoveiy  of  America. 

"  Ne  taketh  of  my  word  no  displeasaunce, 

Thinketh  that  ye  ben  set  in  governynges 

Of  lordes'  doughtres  *  «  « 

Kepeth  wel  tho  that  ye  undertake. 

***** 

And  taketh  keep  of  that  that  I  schal  sayn." 

Chaucer  :  "  Tale  of  the  Doctor  of  Phisik." 

As  inflections  gradually  disappeared,  so  far  as  clearness  of 
expression  is  concerned,  their  places  were  effectually  filled 
by  the  auxiliary  let  and  constant  recourse  to  pronouns.  The 
former  supplied  all  that  was  peculiar  in  the  imperative  mood ; 
the  latter  distinguished  person  and  number.  There  was  no 
loss  of  intelligibility,  but  there  was  a  loss  of  brevity,  and 
consequently  of  force.  We  now  use  let  with  the  first  and 
third  persons  of  both  numbers.  "  Let  me  die  the  death  of 
the  righteous,"  said  the  eastern  seer. 

"  Let  my  boy  bishop  fret  his  fill." 

Scott  :  "  Marmion." 

We  have  already  seen  that  let  originally  meant  permit,  a 
meaning  which  it  often  has  yet  in  various  degrees.  Its  re- 
duction from  an  independent  verb  to  a  mere  sign  of  a  mood 
began   in   Anglo-Saxon ;    but  it  was  used  as  an   auxiliary 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  459 

sparingly  before  the  fifteenth  century.  Considered  by  itself, 
and  apart  from  the  verb  that  follows  it,  the  auxiliary  let  is 
imperative. 

In  the  once  familiar  words,  "  Thy  kingdom  come,''  of 
what  mood  is  come  ?  That  is  a  question  I  cannot  answer  ; 
but  I  can  adduce  a  few  facts  that  may  contribute  to  a  better 
understanding  of  it. 

First. — Authorities  are  not  agreed.  Most  writers  on 
English  Grammar,  who  have  noticed  the  point  at  all,  hold 
that  verbs  so  situated  are  imperative  ;  but  the  most  learned 
think  otherwise.  Matzner  regards  them  as  subjunctive; 
Professor  Whitney  calls  them  optative  subjunctives.^ 

Second. — As  naming  is  not  intended  to  change  their  form, 
position,  or  force,  for  the  practical  purpose  of  speaking  and 
writing  good  English,  it  is  not  of  the  slightest  importance 
what  they  are  called. 

Third. — They  do  not  result  from  dropping  may,  still  less 
from  an  elision  of  let.  In  the  particular  instance  given,  we 
might,  indeed,  say  :  "  May  thy  kingdom  come  "  ;  or,  "  Let 
thy  kingdom  come  " ;  but  it  will  be  shown  presently  that 
such  expressions  do  not  originate  in  that  way.  Moreover, 
in  many  instances  such  an  explanation  would  be  inad- 
missible, thus  : 

"  *  Submit  we  then  to  force,'  said  Clare." 

Scott  :  "  Marmion,"  vi.,  32. 

This  is  not  an  apocopated  substitute  for  ^^  May  submit 
we,"  still  less  for  "  Let  submit  we  "  ;  and  there  are  hundreds 
of  such  examples  to  be  found. 

Owing  to  the  great  scarcity  of  verbal  forms  in  English,  the 
simple  ground-form  of  the  verb  is  extensively  used.  It  is 
the  form  alike  of  the  subjunctive,  imperative,  infinitive,  and 
in  part  of  the  indicative.  The  form,  therefore,  decides 
nothing,  but  all  agree  substantially  that  in  the  phrases  under 
consideration  the  verb  is  either  subjunctive  or  imperative. 
But  in  the  earlier  ages  of  the  language  there  were  forms  that 

'  "  Essentials  of  English  Grammar,"  page  233. 


460  English  Grammar, 

could  be  distinguished.  Anglo-Saxon  had  two  forms  of  the 
imperative,  as  we  have  seen,  one  for  the  singular  and  one  for 
the  plural;  but  both  were  limited  to  the  second  person.  We 
can  suppose  that  these,  for  want  of  others,  might  have  been 
extended  to  the  first  and  third  persons;  but  were  they? 
The  subjunctive  had  also  separate  forms  for  the  singular  and 
the  plural.  In  the  singular  the  two  moods  were  often  alike, 
and  therefore  ambiguous ;  in  the  plural  they  were  always 
unlike.  Now,  in  the  class  of  phrases  in  question  the  verb 
always  agreed  with  forms  of  the  subjunctive  known  to  exist ; 
they  never  agreed  with  known  imperative  forms  where  the 
two  moods  differed.  So  far,  then,  as  they  were  distinguish- 
able they  were  subjunctive.  Shortened,  indistinguishable 
forms,  however,  were  often  used ;  for  the  old  language  was 
written  with  great  irregularity.  A  common  substitute  for 
the  first  person  plural  imperative  was  uton,  utan,  utun,  which 
must  be  construed  as  a  plural  subjunctive.  It  was  used  pre- 
cisely as  we  now  use  "  let  us"  and  was  followed  by  an  infin- 
itive, such  as  gan,  wyrcan,  seglian — let  us  go,  make,  sail,  etc. 
The  third  person  plural  was  the  subjunctive  ending  in  -in, 
-en,  or  -on.  The  following  examples  will  show  how  the  places 
of  the  imperatives  of  the  first  and  third  persons  were  sup- 
plied in  the  earlier  ages,  and  also  that  the  general  use  of  let 
is  comparatively  modern.  It  is  not  necessary  to  introduce 
the  Gothic,  which  also  employed  the  subjunctive  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  imperative,  even  when  there  was  no  percep- 
tible need.  The  examples  are  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  Gospels, 
followed  by  the  versions  of  Wycliffe  and  Tyndale  and  the 
authorized  version. 

Uton  wyrcan  h^r  threo  earthung-stowa, 

Make  we  here  thre  tabernaclis. 

Let  vs  make  iij  tabernacles. 

Let  us  make  three  tabernacles. — Mark  ix.,  5. 

Uton  faran  to  Bethleem, 

Passe  we  ouer  til  to  Bedleem, 

Let  vs  goo  even  vnto  Bethleem, 

Let  us  novf  go  even  unto  Bethlehem. — Luke  ii.,  15. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs,  461 

Fleon  thonne  to  miintum  tha  the  in  ludea-lande  synt, 
Thanne  thei  that  be  in  Judee,  fle  to  mounteynes, 
Then  let  them  whych  be  in  Jury,  flye  into  the  mountaynes, 
Then  let  them  which  be  in  Judeayf^^f  into  the  mountains. 

Matt,  xxiv.,  16. 

hig  hlyston  him, 

heere  thei  hem, 

lett  them  heare  them, 

let  them  hear  them. — Luke  xvi.,  29. 

Sj^  he  on  rode  dhangen, 

Be  he  crucified, 

Lett  him  be  crucified, 

Z^/him  be  crucified. — Matt,  xxvii.,  21. 

The   subjunctive   was  even    used    for    the    second  person 
imperative. 

Nellonge  vesan  svylce  ledse  liceteras. 
Be  not,  as  the  hypocrites. — Matt,  vi.,  16. 
"  Ne  sweregen  ge"     (Swear  ye  not.) — Laws  of  King  Alfred. 

The  same  mode  of  expression  continued  while  the  old 
terminations  were  becoming  more  and  more  indistinct,  sur- 
vived all  distinctions  of  form,  and  may  be  found  in  the 
poetry  of  the  present  century. 

Sceawie  we  thes  uncothe  maen  ur  3efon. 
Look  we  at  these  strange  men,  our  foes. 

Old  Eng.  Homily,  a.d.  1150. 

"  Nu  fusen  we  hom  to  ; 
&  staercliche  heom  leggen  on  ; 
&  wrceken  wunderliche 

ure  cun  &  ure  riche, 
&  wreken  thene  muchele  scome." 

"  Now  go  we  for  them  ; 
And  stoutly  them  lay  on  ; 
And  wondrously  avenge 

Our  kin  and  our  kingdom, 
And  avenge  the  mickle  shame." 

Layamon,  1205. 


462  English  Grammar. 

"  Ne  lipne  no  wif  to  hire  were  ;  ne  were  to  his  wyue. 
Beo  vor  him  seolue  vych  mon,  the  hwile  he  beoth  alyue." 
{Trust  no  wife  to  her  man,  nor  man  unto  his  wife. 
Be  each  man  for  himself,  the  while  he  is  alive.) 

"A  Moral  Ode,"  1250. 

*'' He  that  is  Lord  fortune  be  thy  ster^." 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 

'' Laud  we  the  God%     *     *     * 

Publish  we  this  Peace 
To  all  our  Subjects.     Set  we  forward." 

Shakesp.:  "  Cymbeline,"  v.,  5. 

"  No  man  eat  fruit  of  thee  hereafter  for  ever." 

Mark  xi.,  14. 

"  and  now  be  the  welkin  split  with  vivats." 

Carlyle  :  "  French  Revolution,"  viii.,  12. 

But  while  it  is  evident  enough  that  the  verb  in  such  ex- 
pressions was  originally  subjunctive,  and  is  not  a  remnant 
left  by  dropping  may  or  let,  it  is  not  equally  clear  that  it  is 
still  subjunctive.  There  are  who  adhere  to  various  modifi- 
cations of  the  doctrine  that  words  never  change.  Home 
Tooke  held  that  such  little  words  as  and,  but,  lest,  since, 
though,  yet,  were  originally  verbs,  and  still  are  verbs.  Dr. 
Latham  inclines  to  call  him,  them.,  and  whom  dative  cases, 
because  they  once  were  such,'  while  he  admits  that  in 
present  use  the  case  is  generally  what  is  called  accusative 
or  objective.  But  few  will  go  such  lengths.  The  form  is 
too  simple  and  common  to  distinguish  the  mood  ;  and  the 
construction  is  precisely  that  of  an  imperative,  if  we  had  one 
applicable  to  the  first  and  third  persons.  Probably  most 
persons  who  give  the  point  a  thought  believe  that  they  are 
using  imperatives,  and  intend  to  do  so  by  extending  them 
beyond  their  earlier  limits,  a  thing  that  in  one  way  or  other 
is  done  with  words  every  day.  If  an  ardent  orator  exclaims, 
"  Perish  the  thought ! "  intending  to  use  an  imperative 
mood,  may  it  not  be  imperative  ?     The  sum  of  the  matter 

'  "  English  Language,"  p.  290. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  463 

is  that  the  origin  is  subjunctive,  the  construction  imperative 
the  form  indistinguishable,  the  name  unimportant. 

Infinitive. — In  point  of  form  the  infinitive  is  the  simple, 
unchanged  root-form  of  the  verb.  The  term  "  infinitive 
mood  "  only  denotes  the  particular  relation  of  the  verb  to 
the  other  words  in  the  sentence.  It  is  called  infinitive  when 
it  follows  an  auxiliary  (except  ought) — bid,  make,  need — and 
verbs  of  perception,  like  see,  hear,  feel — they  may  come,  they 
made  him  promise,  they  bade  him  run,  you  need  not  fear, 
we  saw  the  moon  rise,  heard  the  owls  hoot,  and  felt  the  night 
winds  blow.  We  may  be  allowed  for  the  present  to  call  this  the 
primary  infinitive.  When  preceded  by  the  little  word  to  we 
may  in  like  manner  call  it  the  secondary  infinitive.  Neither 
of  them  has  any  connection  with  infinity.  The  primary  in- 
finitive was  once  much  more  extensively  used  than  now. 
The  number  of  words  that  it  may  follow  is  decreasing. 
Formerly  it  might  be  found  after  beg,  begin,  behoove,  boot, 
charge,  cause,  command,  deign,  desire,  forbid,  force,  go,  intend, 
lie,  entreat,  persuade, pray,  set,  teach,  and  wish.  A  few  words 
are  in  the  transition  state — dare,  need,  please — and  are  fol- 
lowed sometimes  by  the  primary  and  sometimes  by  the 
secondary  infinitive.  Naturally  the  primitive  is  used  oftener 
in  poetry  than  in  prose. 

Philologists  are  much  inclined  to  call  the  infinitive  a  verbal 
noun,  not  so  much  because  it  is  now  a  noun — which  it  is  only 
exceptionally — as  because  they  hold  that  it  was  once  a  noun 
— "  lang  syne  Lord  kens  how  lang."  It  has  been  found  that 
Sanskrit  in  its  earlier  stages  liad  about  a  dozen  ways  of  form- 
ing words  expressing  the  action  of  verbs,  but  having  in  some 
of  their  relations  the  effect  of  nouns.  In  course  of  time  only 
one  of  them  survived,  ending  in  -tu  or  -tum,  and  correspond- 
ing to  the  Latin  supines  with  the  same  terminations.  Nouns 
expressing  the  actions  of  verbs  were  formed  in  a  variety  of 
ways  in  Greek  and  Latin,  several  of  which  have  come  over 
into  English,  often  in  a  mutilated  form.  Thus  we  have  from 
Greek  anatom-jj/,  analy-jw,  baptisw,  apha-j/^,  cycloped-?V?, 
poe-vfy/  from  Latin  fav-^r,  cens-us,  com^\e-tion,  con]&c-ture, 
eKperl-ment.     But  such  words  are  nouns  and  nothing  else, 


464  English  Grammar. 

either  in  the  original  languages  or  in  English.  Latin  had, 
indeed,  two  real  hybrids,  half  noun  and  half  verb  ;  and  it 
will  be  seen  presently  that  we  have  words  of  this  mixed 
character.  The  Greek  and  Latin  infinitives  were  employed 
as  nouns  only  exceptionally,  as  we  sometimes  speak  of  the 
ups  and  downs,  the  whereabouts,  the  why,  and  the  sweet  by 
and  by.  There  are  no  considerable  classes  of  constant  verbal 
nouns  native  to  English.  There  are  a  very  few  scattered 
ones,  like  birth,  stealth,  speech,  which  are  exclusively  nouns, 
and  perform  no  duty  as  verbs.  This  may  be  made  clearer 
by  comparing  believe  and  belief  : 

Some  still  believe  in  witchcraft,  but  we  do  not  share  their 
belief. 

The  former  is  wholly  a  verb,  the  latter  a  noun,  and  neither 
can  be  used  in  place  of  the  other.  Yet  there  might  be  words 
partly  both — nouns  on  the  left  side  and  verbs  on  the  right. 
Are  infinitives  of  that  class  ?  Nouns  have  certain  grammati- 
cal characteristics.  They  may  be  limited  by  preceding  ad- 
jectives or  pronouns,  affected  by  prepositions  or  transitive 
verbs,  or  they  may  take  the  plural  form.  None  of  this  is 
true  of  infinitives,  but  all  applies  to  a  class  of  verbal  nouns 
ending  in  -ing,  presently  to  be  considered.  Contrast  earn, 
or  to  earn,  with  earning. 

"  They  live  upon  the  scanty  earnings  of  the  shop." 

We  do  not  make  a  plural  of  earn,  or  to  earn,  nor  place  before 
it  either  of  the  three  words  that  immediately  precede  earn- 
ings. There  is  only  one  preposition,  to,  that  can  precede  an 
infinitive.  It  is  then  either  abortive  and  undeveloped,  or 
almost  entirely  atrophied  on  one  side,  while  its  activity  on 
the  other,  the  verbal  side,  is  unimpaired  : 

"  They  were  unable  to  conceal  him." 

If,  notwithstanding  these  marked  differences  between  the 
infinitive  and  all  other  nouns,  any  one  still  chooses  to  call  it 
a  noun,  there  is  probably  no  court  that  will  grant  an  injunc- 
tion to  restrain  him.  Infinitives  are  indeed  used  as  nouns, 
but  only  exceptionally,  and  as  almost  any  other  words  might 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs,  465 

be.     The  primary  is  the  rarest,  and  is  now  confined  to  poetry, 
and  following  such  words  as  rather,  better,  best  : 

"  Better  dwell  in  the  midst  of  alarms 
Than  reign  in  this  horrible  place." 

COWPER. 

The  secondary  infinitive  used  as  a  noun  is  more  common  : 

"  For  to  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain.  *  *  *  Never- 
theless to  abide  in  the  flesh  is  more  needful  for  you." 

Phil,  i.,  21. 

"  To  dye,  to  sleepe, 
To  sleepe,  perchance  to  Dreame  :  I  there  's  the  rub." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Hamlet." 

Of  this  infinitive  with  to  Professor  Earle  says  : 

"  here  we  perceive  that  an  opportunity  offers  itself  to  explain 
philologically  one  of  the  most  peculiar  of  the  phenomena  of  the 
English  language.  That  which  we  call  the  English  infinitive 
verb,  such  as  to  live,  to  die,  is  quite  a  modern  thing,  and  is  charac- 
teristic of  English  as  opposed  to  Saxon.  The  question,  in  pres- 
ence of  such  a  new  phenomenon,  is  naturally  raised — Whence 
this  form  of  the  infinitive  verb  ?  We  did  not  borrow  it,  for  it  is 
not  French  nor  Latin  ;  we  did  not  inherit  it,  for  it  is  not  Saxon, 
How  did  it  rise,  and  what  gave  occasion  to  it  ?  " 

These  remarks  are  not  applied,  or  applicable,  to  cases  in 
which  to  is  still  significant  and  equivalent  to  unto,  for,  for 
the  purpose  of,  etc.  Such  a  form  of  expression  is  common  to 
Latin  and  the  languages  derived  from  it,  and  to  all  the  Teu- 
tonic tongues.  The  transition,  which  appears  to  Professor 
Earle  so  remarkable,  to  phrases  in  which  to  is  a  mere  dumb 
sign,  as  in  the  words  of  Saint  Paul  and  of  Hamlet  quoted 
above,  seems  to  me  easy  and  natural — only  a  single  illustra- 
tion of  that  extension  of  words  and  phrases  which  is  going 
on  all  the  time.  It  seems  too  to  have  been  begun  at  a  very 
early  period.  At  least  one  example  can  be  found  in  the 
scanty  remains  of  Gothic  literature.  The  sons  of  Zebedee 
had  asked  Jesus  to  promise  them  the  foremost  positions  in 


466  English  Grammar. 

the  expected  new  kingdom.  The  conclusion  of  his  reply,  as 
rendered  by  Ulfilas,  was  : 

"  Ith  thata  du  sitan  af  taihswon  meinai  uiththau  af  hleidumein 
nist  main  du  giban." 

(But  that  to  sit  on  my  right  hand  or  on  my  left  is  not  mine  to 
give^  Mark  x,,  40. 

In  the  fourth  century,  then,  to  sit  could  be  used  so  com- 
pletely as  a  noun  in  the  nominative  case  that  it  might  take 
the  pronoun  that  before  it,  a  greater  liberty  than  English 
admits  of  now.  This  may  have  been  due  to  Greek  influence. 
This  secondary  infinitive  was  well  preserved  in  the  Norse  or 
Icelandic.  The  following  passage  is  from  the  so-called  Elder 
Edda  (Havamdl  152),  date  uncertain  : 

"  That  kann  ek  it  niunda, 
ef  mik  nauthr  um  stendr. 
at  biarga  fari  minu  a  floti." 
(This  ninth  thing  I  know, 
When  dangers  surround  me, 
To  keep  my  course  safely  at  sea.*) 

Two  more  examples,  taken  from  Egils  Saga  (thirteenth 
century),  may  suffice  " : 

"  Var  that  sithr  hans  at  risa  drdegiss." 
(It  was  his  habit  to  rise  early.)  Page  4. 

"  That  thotti  fodur  meinum  sigr,  at  deyia  i  koniingdomi  med 
ssemd." 

(TV  die  a  king,  with  honor,  seemed  to  my  father  a  victory.) 

Page  8. 

If,  then,  a  source  for  the  secondary  infinitive  be  wanted, 
we  may  naturally  look  to  the  Scandinavian  settlements  in 
the  north  and  east  of  England. 

In  the  Teutonic  tongues  the  infinitives  originally  ended 
in  -an.  In  the  Gothic  this  was  invariable.  In  A.-S.  it  often 
took  the  form  -on,  and  it  had  a  vestige  of  inflection  as  a 

'  Saemundar  Edda.     Paderborn,  1876. 
*  Egils  Saga.     Havnise,  MDCCCIX. 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  467 

noun — a  dative  singular  ending  in  -7ine,  always  preceded 
by  to. 

"  Ac  hwi  f^rde  ge  to  seonne  ?" 
(But  what  went  ye  to  see  ?) 

Luke  vii.,  25. 

This  might  be  otherwise  expressed :  for  the  purpose  of 
seeing. 

"manega  witegan  and  rihtwlse  gewilnudon  tha  thing  to  geseonne 
the  ge  gesoth." 

(many  prophets  and  righteous  men  have  desired  to  see  those 
things  that  ye  see.)  Matt,  xiii.,  17. 

"Hit  is  sceame  to  tellane,  ac  hit  thuhte  him  nan  sceanie  to 
donne." 

(It  is  a  shame  to  tell,  but  it  seemed  no  shame  to  him  to  do.) 

Peterborough  Chronicle. 

The  secondary  infinitive  is  here  equal  to  in  and  a  verbal 
noun — in  telling,  in  doing.  In  the  case  of  Peter  Pindar's 
razors,  which  were  good  to  sell,  not  to  cut,  the  usefulness 
was  for  selling  and  not  for  cutting.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  to  was  once  significant,  and  meant  what  we  now  usually 
express  by  to  or  for  ;  but  that  meaning  gradually  faded  out, 
so  that  now  it  seldom  has  any  that  is  appreciable.  It  has 
become  a  mere  earmark  of  the  infinitive  mood,  and  another 
preposition   is  sometimes  placed  before  it  as  if  itself  were 

none. 

"  But  what  went  ye  out  for  to  see  ? " 

Matt,  xi.,  8. 
The  terminations  -an,  -on,  -enn,  -enne,  began  to  be  clipped 
off  so  early  as  the  twelfth  century,  the  sliding  scale  being 
sing-an,  sing-en,  sing-e,  sing.  The  old  endings  may  be  said 
to  have  fairly  disappeared  by  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  to  be  only  rarely  seen  again  in  the  affected  archaism 
of  poetry. 

"  No  longer  can  she  now  her  shrieks  command  ; 
And  hardly  she  forbears,  through  awful  fear, 
To  rushen  forth,  and  with  presumptuous  hand, 
To  stay  harsh  justice  in  his  mid  career." 

Shenstone  :  "  Schoolmistress.*' 


468  English  Grammar. 

Participles. — In  the  infinitive  mood  the  verb  is  shaded 
off  into  a  noun ;  in  the  participle  it  becomes  an  adjective. 
We  have  two  participles  in  English,  but  could  find  use  for 
several  more.  Greek  has  ten  or  more,  which  are  among  the 
beauties  of  that  wonderful  language.  We  supply  the  defect 
in  part  by  such  composite  phrases  as  having  written,  having 
been  written,  being  on  the  point  of  writing,  having  been  intend- 
ing to  write,  for  the  purpose  of  writing,  with  the  intention  of 
writing. 

Our  first  participle  always  ends  in  -ing ;  the  second  gen- 
erally ending  in  -en  or  -ed,  takes  the  various  forms  exhibited 
on  pages  353-367.  The  two  are  contrasted  in  three  ways. 
The  first  relates  to  the  present,  the  second  to  the  past ;  the 
first  is  active,  the  second  passive ;  the  first  expresses  what  is 
going  on  and  unfinished,  the  second  what  is  ended.  It  is 
common  to  call  them  the  present  participle  and  the  past 
participle. 

In  most  of  the  Aryan  languages  the  present  participle 
originally  ended  in  -nt  or  -nd,  often  somewhat  disguised  by 
additional  terminations  indicating  number,  gender,  and  case. 
In  this  respect  early  English  was  no  exception. 

"  they  ben  shapen  into  briddes, 
Swlmm<f;/^  upon  the  wawe  amiddes, 
And  when  she  sigh  her  lord  Xxvend, 
In  likeness  of  a  bird  %\imva\end." 

GowER :  *'  Ceix  and  Alcaeon." 

The  termination  -nd  in  time  gave  place  to  -ng,  one  of  the 
most  considerable  grammatical  changes  in  our  language  since 
the  Norman  Conquest.  This  took  place  from  1200  to  1400; 
the  successive  steps  were  -ande  or  -ende,  -inde,  -inge,  -ing. 
Chaucer  used  both  forms  ;  oftenest  -ing.  The  change  came 
from  the  South,  and  the  old  form  survived  long  in  Scotland. 

"  With  dowbyll  clethyng  frome  the  cald, 
YAXand  zxid.  drynlozw^  quhen  thay  wald." 

Sir  David  Lindesay. 

Before  offering  any  explanation  of  this  change,  I  wish  to 
call  attention  to  four  grammatically  different  uses  of  the 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  469 

verbals  ending  in  -ing.  In  running  water  and  singing  birds 
they  are  adjectives,  as  such  are  placed  before  the  nouns 
which  they  accompany,  and  they  express  no  action.  In 
"The  birds  are  singing,  the  stars  are  shining''  they  are  true 
participles,  expressing  actions  as  verbs,  but  holding  the  place 
of  adjectives  in  the  sentence  quite  as  much  as  if  we 
should  say  :  "  The  birds  are  beautiful;  the  stars  are  bright.'' 
Again,  in  the  expressions,  "  philosophical  writings,  a  hall  for 
dancing,"  we  have  nouns  which  admit  of  the  plural  form. 
Lastly,  there  is  a  usage  more  difficult  to  classify. 

He  escaped  by  breaking  a  window. 

The  true  participle  is  a  hybrid  between  a  verb  and  adjective, 
but  this  is  half  a  verb  and  half  a  noun.  Like  a  noun  it  takes 
a  preposition — by —  before  it ;  or  may  take  a  possessive  pro- 
noun, and,  like  a  verb,  it  is  followed  by  the  object — a  window. 
It  is  Janus-faced,  a  noun  on  the  one  side  and  a  verb  on  the 
other.  Such  a  word  is  called  in  Latin  Grammar  a  gerund.  It 
differs  from  a  verbal  noun  in  taking  an  object  after  it.  The 
preposition  before  it  is  not  a  constant  or  essential  char- 
acteristic. 

He  escaped  by  the  opening  of  a  window. 

Here  opening  is  only  a  verbal  noun.  It  may  be  preceded  by 
the  article  or  a  pronoun,  and  it  takes  no  object  after  it.  Its 
place  may  be  taken  by  a  word  that  makes  no  pretence  to 
being  a  verb,  when  there  happens  to  be  one  suitable. 

"  I  waive  the  quantum  o'  the  sin, 
The  hazard  of  concealing." 

Burns. 

Nothing  but  the  requirements  of  rhyme  prevents  concealment 
from  doing  quite  as  well. 

Of  these  four  tolerably  distinct  uses  of  the  so-called  par- 
ticiple the  first  two  present  no  difficulty.  The  other  two 
were  not  originally  participles  ;  the  only  question  is  whether 
they  had  one  or  two  separate  origins.  To  go  no  farther 
back,  the  Anglo-Saxon  had  a  class  of  nouns  derived  from 
verbs  and  ending  in  -ung  less  frequently  -ing.     A  few  of 


470  English  Grammar. 

them  have  reached  our  time  almost  unchanged,  such  as 
cleansing,  earning,  fasting,  fostering,  fighting,  greeting,  learn- 
ing. In  time  the  endings  of  all  that  survived  of  them  were 
reduced  to  -ing,  and  it  became  the  practice  to  form  one  from 
every  verb  as  occasion  required.  We  have  here  one  source 
of  verbals  in  -ing  employed  as  nouns.  We  have  also  seen 
that  the  infinitive,  ending  in  -an,  -en7te,  -en  was  sometimes 
used  as  a  noun  ;  yet,  if  it  were  from  a  transitive  verb,  it  was 
still  a  verb  on  one  side. 

*'  and  me  nam  rapes  and  caste  in  to  him  for  to  draZen  him  ut 
of  thisse  putte.  Ah  his  licome  wes  se  swithe  fable,  thet  he  ne 
mihte  itholie  the  herdness  of  the  rapes,  tha  sende  me  clathes  ut 
of  thes  Kinges  huse/i?/-  to  bi-winden  the  rapes." 

(And  they  took  ropes  and  threw  them  in  to  him/<?r  to  draw  him 
out  of  this  pit.  But  his  body  was  so  very  feeble  that  he  could 
not  bear  the  hardness  of  the  ropes  ;  then  they  sent  cloths  out  of 
the  King's  house /i?r  to  bewind  the  ropes.) 

"  Old  English  Homily,"  a.d.  1200. 

This  again  shows  how  a  gerundial  use  might  have  arisen. 
There  were  thus  the  verbal  noun  ending  in  -ing,  and  the  in- 
finitive in  -en,  which  might  easily  be  mistaken  for  each  other. 
We  hear  the  two  sounds  assimilated  every  day.  Professor 
Earle  says  that  in  the  fifteenth  century  the  terminations  -yn 
and  -yng  were  often  interchanged  ;  and  he  cites  a  passage 
from  the  preface  to  Caxton's  "  Game  of  Chess,"  A.D.  1474 : 

"  Beseeching  of  them  that  this  litel  werke  shal  see  here  or  rede 
to  haue  me  for  excused  for  the  rude  &  symple  makyng  and 
reducyn  into  our  englisshe," 

The  victory  at  last  remained  with  -ing,  an  evidence  of  care 
like  that  of  the  worthy,  capting  Grifiingwho  brings  chickings 
to  Bosting. 

The  participle  had  begun  to  adopt  the  -ing  as  early  as 
Layamon,  about  1204 ;  and  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  in  our 
time  we  have  three  classes  of  words  originally  distinct, 
melted  into  one.  It  is  not  always  possible  now  to  say  to 
which  group  a  given  word  is  most  nearly  related.  The  diffi- 
culty is  not  lessened  by  the  circumstance  that  experts  are 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  471 

not  agreed.  Some  of  the  combinations,  a  few  examples  of 
which  here  follow,  are  curious,  and  their  analysis  is  more 
difficult  and  uncertain  than  important. 

There  was  a  large  sum  of  money  owing  to  him, 
"  how  shall  I  reconcile  your  temper  with  having  made  so 
strange  a  choice  ?  " 

CoLLEY  CiBBER  :  "  Carelcss  Husband." 

Kington  Oliphant  cites  from  the  "  Lives  of  the  Norths  "  : 

"  he  feared  the  being  made  infamous  "  ; 
and  from  Miss  Burney's  "  Cecilia  "  he  quotes  : 

"  there  was  no  avoiding  asking  him." 
"  the  whig  party  were  in  possession  of  bestowing  all  places  both 
of  the  state  and  of  literature." 

Hume  :  "  Hist  of  Eng.,"  i.,  ix. 

These  examples,  I  think,  are  all  of  a  gerundial  character, 
but,  as  they  stand,  are  not  good  models  for  imitation. 

The  second  participle,  called  indifferently  the  past  parti- 
ciple and  the  passive  participle,  has  pretty  well  escaped 
entangling  combinations  except  in  forming  the  compound 
tenses,  which  have  been  considered  already,  page  353.  It 
may  be  used  as  an  adjective — hewn  timber,  ploughed  land, 
printed  documents, — or  as  a  pure  participle — the  field  is 
ploughed.  Out  of  its  use  as  an  adjective  have  grown  a  swarm 
of  imitations — left-handed,  blue-eyed,  quick-witted,  weak-kneed, 
four-wheeled, — which  some  treat  as  participles  from  verbs 
that  never  existed.  I  regard  them  as  rather  strained  im- 
itations of  such  words  as  saddled,  booted,  gowned,  crowned, 
plumed,  that  is,  furnished  with  saddle,  boots,  gown,  etc. 
This  participle  is  never  a  noun  except  as  any  adjective  may 
occasionally  be  used  as  such.  If  we  say,  "  the  afflicted" 
"  the  vanquished,"  we  still  oftener  speak  of  the  old  and  the 
young,  the  rich  and  the/^^r. 

Participles  are  used  to  form  clauses  that  are  but  loosely 
hung  on  the  main  thread  of  our  discourse. 

"  Not  long  after  the  Spanish  general,  conceiving  that  his  roycU 
captive  was  sufficiently  humbled,  expressed  his  willingness  that  he 
should  return,  if  he  inclined,  to  his  own  palace," — Prescott. 


472  English  Grammar. 

These  attendant  clauses  are  sometimes  still  further  de- 
tached. 

"  And  supper  being  ended,  t/ie  devil  having  put  it  into  the  heart  of 
Judas  Iscariot,  Simon's  son,  to  betray  him  *  *  *  he  riseth 
from  supper."  John  xiii,,  2. 

When  the  subject  of  the  participle  is  thus  entirely  different 
from  the  main  subject  or  actor  in  the  sentence,  the  partici- 
pial clause  is  sometimes  called  the  case  absolute.  These 
participial  clauses  appear  to  be  imitations  of  the  Latin,  in 
which  they  are  very  common. 

THE   PASSIVE   VOICE. 

Thus  far  I  have  treated  only  of  the  active  side  of  verbs ; 
but  when  the  action  takes  effect  upon  any  person  or  thing 
there  is  a  passive  side  and  the  order  of  statement  may  be 
reversed.  If  the  Indian  kills  a  deer,  then  also  a  deer  is 
killed  by  the  Indian.  The  passive  voice  consists  of  some 
form  of  the  verb  to  be  placed  before  the  passive  participle. 
The  verb  admits  of  all  the  variation  of  which  it  is  anywhere 
susceptible,  but  the  participle  remains  always  unchanged. 
Take  every  form  of  the  verb  to  be  and  place  after  it  a  pas- 
sive participle  and  you  have  a  complete  conjugation  of  the 
passive  voice. 

We  have  not  participles  enough,  and  are  put  to  very  awk- 
ward shifts  for  want  of  them.  The  passive  participle  repre- 
sents everything  as  done  and  finished.  It  admits  of  no  de- 
grees and  no  progress.  We  can  say  that  the  house  is  buili, 
which  means  that  it  is  up  at  least,  and  approximately  fin- 
ished ;  but  we  have  no  corresponding  expression  to  show 
that  it  is  in  progress.  To  meet  this  want  there  have  been 
two  kinds  of  make-shifts.  The  most  persistent  of  these  has 
been  the  verbal  noun  ending  in  -ing,  preceded  by  on  or  in 
(ultimately  the  same  word),  by  a,  an  abbreviation  of  them, 
or  even  with  these  suppressed. 

"  Forty  and  six  years  was  this  temple  in  building." 

John  ii.,  20, 


The  Conjugaiio7t  of  Verbs.  473 

"  the  longsuffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah  while  the 
ark  was  a  building^  i  Peter  iii.,  20. 

"  and  therefore  sent  Critheis  to  Smyrna,  which  was  then  build- 
ing" Encycl.  Britan.,  2d  edition.     "Homer." 

Of  these  three  the  first  is  practically  out  of  use,  the  second 
is  rarely  met  with  now,  while  the  third  is  not  uncommon. 
They  all  have  the  same  radical  defect.  They  do  not  distin- 
guish between  active  and  passive,  between  subject  and 
object,  between  the  actor  and  the  thing  acted  upon.  It  was 
probably  the  consciousness  of  this  ambiguity  that  gave  rise 
to  the  expressions  of  which  "  The  house  was  being  built"  is  a 
type.  According  to  Mr.  Kington  Oliphant  this  form  of  ex- 
pression came  into  common  use  about  1770,  although  he 
cites  two  examples  more  than  300  years  older.'  How  many 
examples  escaped  notice  we  cannot  say,  but  so  much  is  clear, 
that  the  expression  has  been  in  the  language  more  than  400 
years.  Many  worthy  persons,  whose  tastes  were  formed  long 
ago,  have  protested  against  the  supposed  novelty  in  a  style 
that  is  more  forcible  than  their  reasoning.  The  most  emi- 
nent is  Cardinal  Newman,  who  in  a  letter,  published  with  his 
permission  by  Professor  Earle,  says  :  "  I  know  nothing  of 
the  history  of  the  language,  and  I  cannot  tell  whether  all  this 
will  stand,  but  this  I  do  know  that,  rationally  or  irrationally, 
I  have  an  undying,  never-dying  hatred  to  '  is  being,'  what- 
ever arguments  are  brought  in  its  favor.  At  the  same  time 
I  fully  grant  that  it  is  so  convenient  in  the  present  state  of 
the  language  that  I  will  not  pledge  myself  I  have  never  been 
guilty  of  using  it."  "  Richard  Grant  White  of  New  York  has 
written  at  greater  length,  but  to  about  the  same  effect.  Now 
I  do  not  agree  with  Cardinal  Newman  as  to  the  convenience 
of  the  expression  :  "  The  house  is  being  built."  It  seems  to 
me  quite  inconvenient,  inelegant,  clumsy,  and  one  that 
would  be  used  only  by  a  person  who  could  think  of  no  other 
to  suit  his  purpose.  Indeed,  it  admits  of  greater  awkward- 
ness than  I  have  ever  seen  represented.     If  we  say,  "  is  being 

'  "Old  and  Middle  English,"  337.     "  New  English,"  vol.  i.,  273. 
^  Earle's  "  Philology  of  the  English  Tongue,"  583. 


474  English  Graminar. 

built,''  we  may  also  say,  "  has  been  being  built,  or  even,  "  The 
house  being  being  built,  the  family  went  away  for  the  sum- 
mer." Any  one  who  will  invent  a  better  phrase  will  deserve 
public  gratitude.  Yet,  bad  as  it  is,  it  serves  the  purpose.  It 
shows  that  the  house  is  in  progress,  and  that  it  is  not  the 
builder  but  the  thing  to  be  built.  Let  us  now  consider  the 
alternatives  offered.  Lieut.  Chas.  C.  Rogers,  U.  S.  Navy, 
reporting  on  the  progress  of  the  Panama  Canal  in  1887, 
wrote,  "  a  bridge  is  now  building  across  the  valley."  It  is 
not  a  mere  quibble  to  object  that  it  was  the  workmen  who 
were  building,  and  not  the  bridge.  The  meaning  would  no 
doubt  be  understood  in  this  particular  case,  but  hundreds 
might  lead  to  the  widest  misapprehension.  Ruskin  in  his 
"  Pre-Raphaelitism  "  says : 

"  the  fishwomen  were  being  blown  about." 
This  is  unmistakable ;  but  had  he  said  : 

"  the  fishwomen  were  blowing  about," 

we  should  be  at  liberty  to  understand  that  they  were  exer- 
cising their  own  wind-powers  rather  than  that  they  were  the 
sport  of  the  elements.  So,  if  one  should  say  that  '*  Mrs. 
Jenkins  was  scolding,"  we  should  naturally  suppose  her  the 
actor  on  the  scene,  and  not  the  victim  of  lingual  castigation. 
Or  again,  if  one  should  rush  into  a  village  exclaiming : 

"  Help,  good  friends,  for  God's  sake  help  !  the  Cardinal  is 
robbing  on  the  other  side  of  the  river," 

I  doubt  not  that  in  such  a  case  even  Cardinal  Newman 
would  rather  be  represented  as  being  robbed. 

If  the  a,  that  is  now  generally  omitted,  be  restored,  the 
case  is  not  thereby  materially  mended.  The  difference  be- 
tween active  and  passive  is  not  distinguished.  In  the  Gospel 
of  John  we  read  that  in  the  darkest  days  of  Christianity, 

"  Simon  Peter  saith  unto  them,  I  go  a  fishing" 

Paraphrased  into  the  language  of  modern  times,  that 
would  be : 

"  It  is  all  over  with  us  now,  and,  as  for  me,  I  am  going  back  to 
work  at  the  old  trade." 


The  Conjugation  of  Verbs.  475 

And  in  a  compilation  that  is  generally  very  pure  English  we 

read  of  a 

"  Little  Baby  Bunting, 
Whose  daddy  went  a  huntings 
To  catch  a  rabbit  for  its  skin, 
To  wrap  the  Baby  Bunting  in." 

Whatever  the  difference  in  dignity,  both  the  despondent 
apostle  and  the  parent  of  Bunting  intended  to  catch  and 
not  to  be  caught.  But  the  rabbit  was  a  party  in  interest, 
albeit  a  passive  one ;  and  when  it  left  its  lair  in  the  morning, 
it  too  went  a  hunting.  Moreover,  the  sound  is  often  a  suffi- 
cient objection. 

"  Billy  Patterson  is  a  assaulting  in  the  street," 

is  both  ambiguous  and  cacophonous.  The  same  twofold 
objection  would  lie  against  in. 

That  matter  is  in  inquiring  into. 

Where  several  words  intervene  between  is  and  being  the 
substitution  of  the  older  expressions  would  often  be  very 
inelegant  as  well  as  ambiguous. 

The  boys  were  in  a  row  the  whole  length  of  the  hall  examining. 

In  short,  expressions  like  "  is  being  built,"  serve  the  purpose 
completely ;  the  others  are  often  still  more  inelegant,  and 
never  fully  serve  the  purpose. 

English,  having  no  original  reflexive  pronoun,  has  no 
middle  voice.  Still,  by  a  number  of  contrivances,  we  can 
attain  that  end  substantially.  We  can  use  the  pronouns 
myself , yourself ,  etc.,  after  transitive  verbs:  "  I  hurt  myself 
*'  You  deceive  yourself ^^  "  He  built  himself  a  house."  More 
subtle  and  liable  to  escape  notice  is  the  formation  of  a  kind 
of  middle  voice  by  using  get  as  an  auxiliary :  "  I  got  up," 
"  He  got  tired,"  "They  got  married,"  "  He  got  elected." 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
ADVERBS,  PREPOSITIONS,  AND  CONJUNCTIONS. 

The  remaining  parts  of  speech  are  much  less  subject  to 
grammatical  requirements  than  those  already  considered. 
Most  adverbs  admit  of  a  change  of  form  to  express  degree : 
"  He  ran  fast  and  faster."  Very  many  reach  a  similar  result 
by  the  help  of  more  and  most,  while  a  considerable  num- 
ber are  invariable,  and  none  of  them  require  a  change 
of  form  in  other  words.  Prepositions  are  themselves  un- 
changeable, but  necessitate  a  change  of  case,  so  far  as  that 
is  possible,  in  nouns  and  pronouns  that  follow  them.  Con- 
junctions neither  undergo  nor  cause  change. 

These  three  parts  of  speech  are  so  shaded  into  each  other 
that  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  say  in  a  given  instance  to 
which  class  a  word  belongs  ;  and  still  oftener  the  same  word 
is  used  in  one  or  the  other  way  as  occasion  may  require. 
The  class  of  adverbs  is  large  ;  the  two  others  very  small. 

ADVERBS. 

The  term  adverb  means  added  to  a  verb,  as  the  most  fre- 
quent use  is  to  describe  the  manner,  intensity,  or  circum- 
stances of  the  action  represented  by  the  verb.  But,  as 
usually  happens,  from  that  starting-point  it  spreads  till  it 
reaches  the  adjective  as  well.  I  have  expressed  the  belief 
that  the  foundation  of  language  is  the  names  of  things,  that 
is,  of  whatever  we  can  think  of,  but  things  have  their  quali- 
ties and  activities,  and  if  names  or  nouns  be  the  primary 
formation,  adjectives  and  verbs  are  a  secondary  deposit. 
And  continuing  the  geological  figure,  we  may  call  adverbs 
a  tertiary  stratum,  and  represent  the  arrangement  thus  : 

476 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.       477 


ADVERBS 

ADVERBS 

ADJECTIVES 

VERBS 

NOUNS. 

There  is  even  a  fourth  layer  of  adverbs  superimposed 
upon  these. 

Adverbs  are  so  heterogeneous  and  derived  from  so  many 
sources  that  it  has  sometimes  been  said  that  all  words  tend 
to  become  adverbs.  The  class  is  the  final  resting-place  of 
waifs  and  strays — the  depository  of  the  odds  and  ends  of 
language.  But  on  entering  this  class  words  lose  more  or 
less  of  their  individuality  and  significance.  Sometimes  they 
are  used  without  any  meaning ;  oftener  they  give  a  mere 
shade  or  piquancy  to  the  sentence ;  and  he  who  would  write 
well  should  use  them  sparingly.     We  read  that : 

"  There  was  a  man  in  the  land  of  Uz,  whose  name  was  Job." 

The  first  word  is  required  by  the  habit  of  the  languge,  but 
adds  nothing  to  the  statement.     So  we  may  hear  one  say : 

"  Well,  now  then,  what  are  you  going  to  do  about  it  ?  " 

It  would  be  a  good  exercise  of  acuteness  to  tell  the  force  of 
each  of  the  first  three  words. 

An  approximate — but  only  approximate — definition  of 
adverbs  would  be  that  they  are  words  accompanying  verbs, 
adjectives,  or  even  other  adverbs,  and  expressing  place, 
time,  number,  order  of  succession,  manner,  or  degree — here, 
then,  twice,  thirdly,  unawares,  very.  But  although  this  may 
include  some  99  per  cent,  of  adverbs,  there  are  others  that, 
likeyea  and  amen,  defy  classification ;  for  words  refused  admit- 
tance anywhere  else  are  usually  taken  in  among  the  adverbs. 

Adverbs  may  be  variously  classified  upon  a  variety  of  prin- 
ciples that  have  no  relation  to  each  other.  They  may  be 
divided,  as  above,  according  to  signification  ;  or  they  may  be 
divided  with  reference  to  their  derivation  ;  or  into  those  that 
do  and  those  that  do  not  admit  of  a  difference  of  degree ; 
or  again  into  simple,  compound,  and  adverbial  phrases  not  yet 
condensed  into  single  words.     The  same  word  may  belong 


478  English  Grammar, 

to  two  or  more  classes ;  and  may  be  at  one  time  an  adverb, 
at  another  a  preposition,  a  conjunction,  or  something  else. 
Although  it  is  nearly  certain  that  every  existing  adverb  is 
a  modification  or  a  derivative  of  some  other  word,  yet  a  few 
have  held  their  present  places  so  long  that  the  student  of 
English  may,  for  his  purposes,  call  them  primitive  or  original. 
They  are : 


aft 

forth 

off 

so 

after 

in 

oft,  or  often 

soon 

as 

less 

on 

too 

ere 

lief 

out 

up 

erst 

not 

over 

well 

ever 

now 

seldom 

yet 

When  a  word  is  by  turns  adverb  and  preposition,  sometimes 
with  a  slight  difference  of  form,  as  of  and  off,  to  and  too, 
it  is  sometimes  impossible,  and  never  important,  to  determine 
which  part  it  played  first.  A  large  number  are  derived  in 
various  ways  from  nouns — a  few  without  any  change,  as  east, 
west,  north,  south,  home,  while,  yesterday.  The  greatest  part 
of  those  derived  from  nouns  are  formed  by  prefixing  a, 
which  stands  for  an  original  on,  reduced  first  to  in,  and  then 
to  a.  The  present  meaning  of  the  prefix  is  on,  to,  or  towards. 
Many  are  made  from  other  parts  of  speech  by  imitation. 
About  120  adverbs  formed  in  this  manner  are  still  available 
for  use,  and  an  almost  equal  number  have  become  obsolete. 
Of  those  remaining  aboard,  adrift,  afloat,  afoot,  aground,  alive, 
aloft,  ashore,  aside,  asleep,  astern,  awry,  are  familiar  examples. 

In  several  the  prefix  a  has  not  the  same  origin  or  force. 
It  is  from  off  and  of  in 

adown '      afresh  anew  anight    s 

afar  akin  anigh  a'clock,  or  o'clock 

^  In  adown  a  is  off  and  down  or  dune  is  a  hill.  "  Dale  and  down  "  for  val- 
ley and  hill  is  common  in  old  ballads. 

1         ''  The  lady  sat  on  castil  wa' , 

Beheld  baith  dale  and  doun, 
And  there  she  saw  Gill  Morice'  head 
Cum  trailing  to  the  toun." 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.       479 

In  a  few  it  is  the  French  a  from  Latin  ad. 

alamode,  alamort,  apart. 

The  a  in  alike  and  aware  is  a  phonetic  degradation  of  A.-S. 
prefix  ge — without  any  precise  meaning — so  common  in  early 
EngHsh  and  in  German. 

Along,  in  the  direction  of  the  length,  contains  a  relic  of 
the  A.-S.  and  =  out,  forth,  away.*  Knd-long  is  a  better  pre- 
served form  of  the  same. 

Amuck,  Malayan,  is  probably  understood  by  most  read- 
ers as  two  words,  the  article  a  and  an  Eastern  word,  muck  ; 
but  it  is  a  single  adjective — frenzied,  furious — used  ad- 
verbially. 

A  few  are  formed  with  the  prefix  be — originally  the  same 
as  by. 

bechance  before  beforehand 

behind  below  beneath 

besides  betimes  between 

Several  adverbs  originated  as  genitive  cases  of  nouns,  pro- 
nouns, or  adjective  pronouns.  None  of  these  now  remain  in 
general  use  and  entirely  unaltered  except  needs. 

"They  must  needs  be  borne,  because  they  cannot  go." 

Jeremiah  x.,  5. 

Several  genitive  cases,  like  days,  for  of  the  day,  in  the  day 
time  ;  nights,  at  night,  in  the  night  time,  have  gone  out  of  use. 

"  Heo  wolden  feden  thone  king,  dates  and  nihtes." 
(They  were  willing  to  feed  the  king  day  and  night.) 

Layamon. 

The  following  are  either  derivatives  or  imitations  of  geni- 
tives : 


always 

forwards 

outwards 

twice 

anights 

hence 

since 

unawares 

backwards 

nowadays 

sometimes 

upwards 

besides 

noways 

thence 

whence 

betimes 

once 

thrice 

eftsoons 

onwards 

towards 

'  A  different  word  from  the  old  preposition  along  -=  owing  to. 


480  English  Grammar. 

We  have  scarcely  a  trace  left  of  a  class  of  feminine  geni- 
tives that  ended  in  -linga,  -lunga,  darkling,  flatting,  headlong, 
sidelong.  Like  other  old  words,  they  have  been  best  pre- 
served in  Scotland.  Burns  has  two,  to  which  he  adds  the 
genitive  s,  in  "  Halloween." 

"  Rab  stowlins  pried  her  bonnie  mou 

Fu'  cozie  in  the  neuk  for  't." 
"  An  darklins  graipit  for  the  bauks, 
And  in  the  blue  clew  throws  then.'' 

Of  old  dative  cases  in  -um  or  -om  we  have  at  least  one  in 
good  use — seldom — from  an  adjective  seld,  rare.  Whilom  is 
nearly  obsolete. 

Adverbs  are  also  formed  by  prefixing  various  prepositions 
to  nouns. 

aboveboard  indeed  perforce 

abovedeck  instead  perhaps 

aforetime  overhead  to-day 

alongshore  overland  together 

alongside  peradventure  to-morrow 

beforehand  perchance  to-night 

Much  the  greatest  number  of  adverbs  are  formed  from  ad- 
jectives by  adding  -ly — A.-S.  -lice — like  brave-ly,  cool-ly,  earn- 
est-ly.  If  the  adjective  already  end  in  -ly — costly,  deadly, 
early,  goodly,  holy,  jolly,  lordly,  silly,  a  second  -ly  is  not  added. 
A  considerable  number  of  adjectives  may  be  used  adverb- 
ially without  change.  With  some  it  is  left  optional  to  add 
or  omit  -ly.  We  my  say:  "  He  spoke  very  loud,''  or,  "  He 
spoke  very  loudly."  We  add  -ly  more  regularly  than  our  an- 
cestors did  a  few  centuries  ago.  Naturally  the  poets  omit  it 
oftener  than  prose  writers,  partly  from  the  requirements 
of  verse,  and  partly  through  their  fondness  for  antiquated 
style.  The  following  are  examples  of  adjectives  oftenest 
employed  adverbially  without  change : 

aghast         fain  little         naked  crooked 

better  fast  less  parallel         sheer 

best  full  least         plump  zigzag 

clean  hollow        long         straight        low 

';  empty 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.       481 

A  few  of  those  that  frequently  omit  -ly  have  a  somewhat 
different  meaning  when  it  is  added. 


clear 

full 

open 

wrong 

dark 

high 

short 

quite  is  another  form 

deep 

late 

still 

for  quit 

fair 

near 

wild 

Many  adjectives  expressing  native  country,  source,  mate- 
rial, shape,  and  essential  character,  do  not  admit  of  being 
used  adverbially  in  any  way.  Swedish,  fossil,  carbonaceous, 
metallic,  alkaline,  sandy,  fibrous,  oval,  triangular,  meteoric^ 
stellar. 

Adverbs  are  also  formed  from  pronouns.  There  is  a 
tolerably  regular  series  from  the  same  radical  sources  that 
give  us  he,  that,  this,  and  who. 


he 

here 

hither 

hence 

that 

then 

there 

thither 

thence 

the* 

this 

thus 

who 

when 

where 

whither 

whence 

why 

how 

From  a  part  of  these  still  other  adverbs  are  developed, 
such  as  henceforth,  thereat,  thenceforward,  however,  where- 
upon. 

Some  adjective  pronouns  are  employed  without  change 
as  adverbs — all,  any,  either,  7ieither,  some,  whether,  yoyider. 

Others  again  are  combined  with  almost  any  kind  of  words 
to  form  adverbs — almost,  alone,  already,  also,  altogether, 
always,  anyhow,  anyway,  anywhere,  anywhither,  anywise, 
everywhere,  otherwise,  sometimes,  somewhere. 

From  the  Aumeral  one  we  have  alone,  anon,  once,  only; 
from  other  numerals,  twice,  thrice,  secondly,  thirdly,  etc. 

Quite  a  number  of  adverbs  are  formed  by  adding  wardy 
expressive  of  direction,  to  nouns,  adverbs  or  prepositions. 

*  In  the  phrase:  "The  more  the  jnerrier."  A.-S.  thy,  an  instrumental 
case  singular  of  the  pronoun. 

"  For  thy  appease  your  grief e  and  heavie  plight." 

Spenser,  "Fairie  Queene^"  ii.,  i,  14. 


482 


English  Grammar. 


Sometimes  s  is  added  in  imitation  of  a  genitive  case 


afterward-s 

backward-s 

downward-s 

eastward 

forward's 

heavenward 


hellward 

hitherward 

homeward-s 

inward 

landward 

leeward 


northward 

onward-s 

outward 

seaward 

southward 

thitherward 


toward-s 
upward-s 
westward 
Vhitherward 


Alias,  alibi,  impromptu,  tandem,  are  Latin  adverbs  used 
sometimes  as  adverbs  and  sometimes  as  nouns. 

Apart  and  very  come  from  the  Latin,  through  the  medium 
of  French.     The  «  is  a  reduction  of  the  Latin  ad. 

Askance  has  a  long  history,  from  an  old  Teutonic  word 
meaning  slanting,  through  Italian  and  French  to  English, 
picking  up  on  its  way  the  prefix  a,  originally  Latin  ad,  too. 

Along,  A.-S.  andlong ;  the  and  meaning  upto,  unto, 
against.  Endlong  is  a  different  form  of  the  same  word. 
The  long  in  headlong  and  sidelong  is  a  different  word  and 
identical  with  ling  in  darkling,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with 
length. 

"  and  loo  !  in  a  greet  bire  al  the  droue  went  heedlynge  in  to  the 
see. 

Wycliffe  :  transl.  Matt.  viii.  32. 

Blindfold  may  be  regarded  as  a  past  participle,  with 
corrupt  pronunciation,  of  an  old  blindfell,  to  fell  or  strike 
blind.  "  Ancren  Riwle,"  A.D.  1210. 

Helter-skelter,  higglety-pigglety,  hurly-burly,  hurry-skurry, 
zig-zag,  although  some  of  them  are  now  old  and  widespread, 
are  such  words  as  people  make  out  of  nothing  on  the 
instant. 

Hodge-podge,  or  hotchpot,  is  traced  to  old  French  pot 
and  hocher,  to  shake  or  stir.  In  such  impromptu  creations 
the  second  half  is  a  mere  repetition  of  the  first,  with  usually 
a  change  of  the  first  consonant  or  vowel. 

Pell-mell :     Old  French /^//^  me  lie  ;  mixed  with  a  shovel. 

Piece-meal — the  first  part  French,  the  last  A.-S.,  both 
meaning  piece.  The  sense  of  the  compound  is  piece  by 
piece.     Meal  is  the  relic  of  a  Saxon  dative  case — tncelum  — 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.       483 

that  has  lost  the  dative  termination.  It  was  formerly 
joined  to  other  words  than  piece.  Chaucer  has  stoundemele, 
hour  after  hour,  and  flockmel,  flock  after  flock ;  and  Shake- 
speare : 

"  O  that  I  had  her  heere,  to  tear  her  Limb-meale." 

"Cymbeline,"  11.,  4. 

Topsy-turvy  is  an  old  word  of  doubtful  origin. 
Upside-down  was  formerly  up-so-down. 

" and  sodenly  the  kinge  thoughte  the  whele  torned  vp-soo-doune*^ 

"  Morte  Darthur,"  a.d.  1469. 
"  wher  sche  ligteth  not  a  lanterne,  and  tumeth  vpsodoun  the 
hous,  and  seketh  diligently,  til  sche  fynde." 

Wycliffe  :  Luke  xv.,  8. 
"  and  he  tumyde  vpsadoun  the  bordis  of  chaungeris,  and  the 
chaiers  of  men  sellynge  culueris." — Id.  :  Matt,  xxi.,  12. 

Evermore,  nevermore,  everywhere  else,  inasmuch,  nevertheless, 
nowadays,  outright,  contrariwise,  are  examples  of  compound 
adverbs.  Indeed,  if  we  have  regard  to  signification  and  not 
form,  any  combination  of  words,  however  long,  expressing 
time,  manner,  or  degree,  may  be  regarded  as  an  adverbial 
phrase.  The  words  in  the  following  parentheses  have  the 
effect  of  adverbs : 

And  (when)  we  moved  (at  the  captain's  beck), 
We  moved  (like  men  in  sleep). 

The  root  of  the  negative  is  the  letter  n  followed  by  a  short 
vowel  to  make  it  pronounceable.  Sanskrit  and  Gypsy,  na ; 
Gothic,  O.  H.  G.,  Welsh,  Irish,  Gaelic,  ni ;  Latin,  French, 
M.  H.  G.,  Russian,  A.-S.,  ne.  The  English  no,  as  a  direct 
negative,  is  the  modern  form  of  A.-S.  nd  {d  becoming  regu- 
larly ^),  formed  by  prefixing  the  negative  n  to  d,  ever,  the 
equivalent  of  the  modern  aye.  In  all  the  earlier  forms  of 
English  it  was  very  common  to  indicate  negation  by  pre- 
fixing this  n,  especially  to  verbs  : 

"iVes  hit  «awiht  longe." 
(It  is  not  no  whit  long.) 

Layamon. 


484  English  Grammar. 

"iVas  ;zeuere  swich  another  as  is  she." 
(Was  not  never  such  another  as  is  she.) 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 

We  still  have  a  few  words,  mostly  adverbs,  formed  in  that 
way — neither,  never,  nay,  n-one,  nor.  No,  meaning  not  any,  is 
an  abbreviation  of  n-one,  analogous  to  the  Latin  non,  formed 
in  the  same  manner : 

"  Give  none  offense,  neither  to  the  Jews  nor  to  the  Gentiles." 

I  Cor.  X.,  32. 

Not  is  an  abbreviation  of  nought  or  naught,  A.-S.,  ndwiht 
— no  whit.  The  simple  negatives  combine  again  with  other 
words  to  form  complex  negatives — nevertheless,  notwithstand- 
ing, etc. 

Nay  is  an  equivalent  for  no,  made  with  the  Norse  ei  or  ey 
(pronounced  aye^,  allied  to  the  Greek  octi,  ever.  Formerly 
there  was  a  slight  difference  of  usage  between  the  two.  Nay 
was  common,  no  emphatic.  No  was  also  the  answer  when 
the  question  contained  a  negative  : 

Is  it  raining  ?    Nay. 
Is  it  not  raining  ?     No. 

Sir  Thomas  More  berated  Tyndale  with  coarse  malignity 
for  not  observing  this  useless  distinction,  and  in  doing  so 
made  a  blunder  himself. 

A  somewhat  similar  distinction  was  observed  between  yea 
and  yes.  The  former  was  a  simple  affirmative,  the  latter  an 
emphatic  declaration,  often  further  reinforced  by  an  oath. 
It  has  been  conjectured  that  yes  is  shortened  from  A.-S. 
gea  sy — yea,  so  be  it.  Although  no  as  a  direct  negative  occurs 
thirty-two  times  in  the  Bible,  j^j  has  not  been  admitted. 
Yea  and  nay  are  nearly  obsolete,  and  only  met  with  in  the 
parliamentary  expression  to  vote  hy  yeas  and  nays ;  but  even 
in  that  case  the  voter  does  not  say  yea  or  nay,  but  aye  or  no. 

Yes,  no,  and  amen  are  usually  classed  among  adverbs  be- 
cause there  is  nowhere  else  to  put  them  ;  but  they  are  in 
effect  sentences  abridged. 


Adverbs^  Prepositions ^  and  Conjunctions.       485 

PREPOSITIONS. 

If  our  purpose  were  to  give  a  learner  his  first  idea  of  a 
preposition,  we  might  say  that  it  is  a  word  which  expresses 
the  relation  of  one  thing  to  another  in  respect  of  place  or 
position.     We  might  go  on  to  illustrate  by  saying : 

**  The  house  stands  upon  rising  ground.  There  is  a  lawn  before 
the  door,  a  veranda  along  one  side  of  the  house,  behind  it  an  apple 
orchard  bending  under  the  weight  of  its  ruddy  fruit.  Below  the 
orchard  the  river  flows  between  rocky  banks,  and  beyond  it  rises  a 
steep  woody  hill.  A  little  up  the  stream  there  is  a  bridge  across 
it,  so  high  that  boats  can  pass  beneath  it." 

We  might  next  explain,  what  is  so  very  common,  that  a 
device  found  to  serve  well  for  one  purpose  is  apt  to  be 
applied  to  many  others.  So  many  other  relations  besides 
those  of  place  are  expressed  by  prepositions.  Thus  there 
are  relations  of  time — before  noon  ;  between  dawn  and  sun- 
rise ;  during  the  eclipse ;  after  the  Revolution.  Before 
frost,  before  rain,  after  taking  the  oath,  are  but  slight 
modifications  of  the  same.  Prepositions  also  express  cause, 
instrumentality,  manner,  and  purpose. 

The  house  was  struck  by  lightning. 
It  was  all  through  love  of  fame. 
They  fied/(?r  fear  of  discovery, 
The  letter  was  sealed  with  wax. 
She  prayed  with  zeal  and  fervor. 
They  were  working /i^r  an  education. 

Prepositions   thus   take   a  variety  of  secondary  meanings. 
Through  has  not  the  same  signification  in  : 

I  was  walking  through  a  wood,  and 

They  betrayed  him  through  envy. 

So  one  may  walk  with  a  lady,  with  difficulty,  with  a  limp, 

with  a  cane,  with  a  sprained  ankle. 

A  few  prepositions  may  be  regarded  as  original : 
at  for  over  up 

by  from  through  with 

ere  in  or  on  under 


486  English  Grammar, 

but  by  far  the  greater  number  are  derivatives  or  compounds. 
Some  are  formed  by  prefixing  a,  as  explained  under  adverbs, 
— about,  above,  against,  along,  among,  arou?id,  athwart.  Still 
more  are  made  with  be,  a  reduced  form  of  ^/, — before,  behind, 
below,  beneath,  beside,  besides,  between,  betwixt,  beyond. 

Prepositions,  whether  consisting  of  single  words,  or  com- 
pounds like  the  above,  are  mostly  native,  but  a  few  of  Latin 
origin  are  to  be  met  with — -per,  as  so  much  per  ton  ;  versus ; 
sine,  or  its  French  derivative  sans  ;  plus,  minus. 

Phrases  made  up  of  several  words,  of  which  the  last  is 
usually  a  preposition,  often  have  constructively  the  effect 
of  prepositions — because  of,  with  reference  to,  in  consequence 
of.     To  the  formation  of  these  there  is  no  limit. 

Simple  prepositions  are  also  united  into  compounds — 
into,  upon,  within. 

A  number  of  words  used  as  prepositions  are  verbs,  us- 
ually in  the  form  of  participles,  but  a  few  have  taken  that 
of  imperatives — during,  pending,  passing,  regarding,  respect- 
ing, touching,  notwithstanding,  save,  except. 

A  few  of  the  prepositions  have  peculiarities  of  formation 
or  use  that  will  justify  short  remarks. 

A,  in  the  expression  "  ten  cents  a  peck,"  is  no  doubt 
generally  regarded  as  an  article ;  and  perhaps  so  it  is,  for 
doubtless  the  speaker  generally  intends  an  article.  But  it 
was  not  so  originally.  It  was  the  same  as  the  a  in  a-foot, 
a-shore,  and  represented  on.  The  n  was  retained  before  a 
vowel,  of  which  there  is  a  relic  in  the  old  scriptural  word 
ano7z.  In  "  ten  cents  a  peck  "  there  is  not  an  omission  of  a 
preposition,  but  in  "  ten  CQnts  for  a  peck  "  there  is  an  inter- 
polation oi  for. 

"  Thrywa  on  gear."  Thrice  a  year. 

"  An  halpenny  on  day."  A  halfpenny  a  day.' 

After — after,  is  a  comparative  of  af  =  of. 
But — be-utan — on  the  outside,  without, — is  adverb,  prep- 
osition, and   conjunction ;  but  in  modern  speech  the  uses 

*  Morris,  "Outlines  of  English  Accidence,"  page  195. 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions,       487 

are  so  inextricably  mixed  that  it  is  often  impossible  to 
distinguish  the  two  latter.  In  older  writers  it  is  found  as  a 
preposition  with  the  sense  of  without. 

"  But  meat  or  drinke  she  dressed  her  to  lie. 
In  a  darke  corner  of  the  hous  alone." 

Chaucer  :  "Troylus  and  Criseide." 

Mr.  Home  Tooke  has  collected  thirty-four  passages  from 
Gawin  Douglas  in  which  but,  with  this  prepositional  mean- 
ing, occurs  alongside  of  the  conjunction  but.  Allan  Ramsay 
says : 

"  I  *d  tak  my  Katie  but  a  gown, 
Barefooted  in  her  little  coatie." 

The  adverbial  force  of  but  is  only,  and  is  an  outgrowth  of 
the  conjunction  with  a  negative  before  it. 

"  If  they  kill  us,  we  shall  but  die." 

2  Kings  vii.,  4. 

More  fully:  "we  shall  not  but  die" — that  is,  "we  shall  not 
(fare  any  worse)  but  we  shall  die."  Most  frequently  it  is  a 
conjunction  ;  and  when  it  has  the  force  of  a  preposition  it  is 
equal  to  except ;  but  the  uncertainty  of  how  much  has  been 
left  out,  and  consequently  what  part  of  speech  it  is,  may 
account  for  its  rarely  taking  an  objective  case  after  it. 

"  He  seide  vnto  tham  alle  that  purueied  suld  it  be 
That  in  alle  the  lond  suld  be  no  kyng  bot  he." 

Robert  of  Gloucester. 

"  Away  went  Gilpin,  who  but  he?" 

COWPER. 

By. — The  primary  meaning  in  Saxon  and  English  is  along 
side  of,  whence  it  widens  out  to  express  accompaniment, 
active  agency,  and  many  other  shades  of  signification.  The 
"  Century  Dictionary  "  enumerates  nineteen.  In  Gothic,  it 
had  signified  about,  concerning.  This  meaning  it  also  had  in 
Anglo-Saxon : 


488  English  Grammar. 

"he  rehte  him  of  Moyse  and  of  eallum  haligum  gewritum, 
the  be  him  awritene  waeron." 

(He  told  them  from  Moses  and  from  all  the  Scriptures  what 
had  been  written  about  him.) 

Luke  xxiv.,  27. 

"  Thou  hast  spoken  evil  words  by  the  queen." 

Fox. 

It  then  glided  into  the  sense  of  against — something  bad 
about  one — of  which  we  have  a  curious  instance  in 
I  Cor.  iv.,  4 : 

**  For  I  know  nothing  by  myself,  yet  am  I  not  thereby 
justified." 

The  revised  version  has :  "  I  know  nothing  against  myself." 

Another  peculiar  expression  is  to  do  well  or  ill  by  a  person, 
instead  of  to  or  for.     This  does  not  seem  to  be  a  good  usage. 

During. — Dure  was  formerly  equivalent  to  the  present 
endure — to  last  or  continue.  The  gradual  transformation  of 
such  a  word  into  a  preposition  may  be  better  seen  in  the 
similar  word  pending :  i  "while  the  trial  is  pending'';  2,  the 
case  absolute  form,  "  the  trial  pending  ";  then,  3  "  pending 
the  trial." 

Like,  originally  an  adjective,  is  not  generally  reckoned  a 
preposition,  but  it  has  all  the  effect  of  one,  and  is  followed 
by  me,  us,  him,  them,  etc.  So  long  as  our  language  had 
cases,  like  was  followed  by  the  dative ;  and  when  they  dis- 
appeared to  was  sometimes  inserted  to  supply  the  supposed 
want  of  a  case  ending.  But  to  is  no  more  necessary,  and 
hardly  more  common  after  like,  than  after  give  or  tell. 

Near,  another  adjective  generally  used  as  an  adverb  or  a 
preposition.  It  is  really  a  comparative  of  neah,  from  which 
we  have  the  modern  nigh. 

Nigh  and  near  are  used  both  with  and  without  the  un- 
necessary to. 

Of,  so  far  as  its  form  is  concerned,  is  but  little  changed 
from  the  Gothic  af,  and  not  at  all  from  A.-S.  of,  the  primary 
meaning  of  which  was  from,  off  from,  away  from.  We  retain 
the  original  sense  only  in  speaking  of  the  material  of  or  from 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions,       489 

which  anything  is  made,  or  the  source  from  which  it  comes. 
As  equivalent  to  by,  expressing  agency,  it  is  common  in  the 
Bible,  but  no  longer  in  use. 

"  All  their  works  they  do  to  be  seen  of  men." 

Matt,  xxiii.,  5. 

Speaking  of  its  present  range  of  use,  Professor  Earle  says : 

"  Probably  it  occurs  as  often  as  all  the  other  prepositions  put 
together.  It  is  a  characteristic  feature  of  the  stage  of  the  language 
which  we  call  by  distinction  English,  as  opposed  to  Saxon.  And 
this  character,  like  so  many  characters  really  distinctive  of  the 
modem  language,  is  French.  Nine  times  out  of  ten  that  of  is 
used  in  English,  it  represents  the  French  de.  It  is  the  French 
preposition  in  a  Saxon  mask  *  *  *  The  common  and  current 
of,  which  is  so  profusely  sprinkled  over  every  page,  is  French  in 
its  inward  essence.  Numerous  as  are  the  places  in  which  this 
preposition  now  occurs,  it  is  less  rife  than  it  was.  In  the  fifteenth 
and  sixteenth  centuries  the  language  teemed  with  it.  It  recurred 
and  re-recurred  to  satiety.    This  Frenchism  is  now  much  abated."  * 

The  following  examples  from  Shakespeare  will  illustrate 
these  "  Frenchisms  " : 

"  I  go  ^  message  from  the  queen  to  France." 
"  I  like  not  of  this  flight  of  Edwards." 
"  I  am  your  husband  if  you  like  of  me." 
"  Sight  may  distinguish  of  colours." 

Since. — The  Saxons  had  an  adverb  and  preposition  sith, 
meaning  after,  since,  which  managed  to  steal  down  the  ages 
into  the  English  Bible  : 

"  sith  thou  hast  not  hated  blood,  even  blood  shall  pursue 
thee." 

This  sith  was  sometimes  followed  by  a  dative  case  of  the 
demonstrative  pronoun,  making  sith  tham.  This  became 
reduced  in  time  to  siththen,  or  sithen.  To  this  again  was 
added  an  s,  in  imitation  of  a  genitive  case — sithens.     Next 

'  "Philology  of  the  English  Tongue,"  523. 


490  English  Grammar. 

th  was  dropped  out  and  the  remainder  appeared  as  sins  or 
sens.  Since  followed  as  a  mere  change  of  spelling  to  keep 
the  word  from  being  pronounced  sinz. 

Till  is  the  Scandinavian  for  to^  and  therefore  naturally 
belongs  to  the  Northumbrian  dialect  and  to  Scotland.  Bar- 
bour and  Sir  David  Lyndesay  use  to  and  till  interchange- 
ably.    The  former  has  "  to  win  and  till  occupy,"  and — 

"  He  ran  on  feet  always  hym  by, 
Till  he  in-till  the  wod  wes  gane. 
Than  said  he  till  hyra-self  allane." 

The  latter  in  describing  the  last  Judgment  makes  the  angel 
proclaim : 

"  Ryse,  dede  folk,  cum  to  Jugement." 

Then 

"The  one  to  plesour  salbe  led." 
"  The  one  tyll  euerlastyng  glore." 

The  two  words  have  still  the  same  meaning,  but  not  the  same 
extent  of  application.  Till  is  restricted  to  duration  of  time. 
One  may  walk  ////  noon,  but  not  till  town. 

Towards  Avas  sometimes  divided  into  two  parts  and  a 
word  placed  between.  This  kind  of  infixation  is  extremely 
common  in  some  North  American  dialects,  as  the  Dacotah, 
but  is  rare  in  English.  There  are  several  instances  in  the 
Bible,  as — 

"the  exceeding  greatness  of  his  power  to  us-ward." 

Ephes.  i.,  19. 

Unto  and  until  are  doubled  prepositions.  Un  for  Gothic 
and  old  Saxon  und,  is  not  found  in  A.-S.  in  either  form,  yet 
found  its  way  into  English.  The  meaning  is  to,  so  that  un- 
to =  to  to. 

With.  There  were  two  prepositions  in  A.-S.  and  early 
English,  mid,  with  and  with,  against, 

"  Se  the  nys  midvaty  he  is  ongen  me." 
(He  that  is  n't  with  me,  he  is  against  me.) 

Matt,  xii.,  30. 


Adverbs'.,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.        491 

"Nu  leofemen  for  godes  liefe  witeth  eow  with  thes  deofles." 
Now,  dear  men,  for  God's  love,  guard  yourselves  against  these 
devils.  "  Old  English  Homily." 

Mid  is  entirely  out  of  use  as  a  separate  word,  remaining  only 
as  a  prefix  in  midwife.  The  distinction  between  the  two 
words  is  well  shown  in  a  passage  of  the  "  Saxon  Chronicle  ": 

"  And  him  come  to-gaenes  Willelm  eorl  of  Albamar  the  the  king 
hadde  beteht  Euorwic  &  to  other  aeuez  men  mid  faen  men  and 
fuhten  widYaxa.  &  flemden  the  king  set  the  Standard." 

(And  William  Earl  of  Albemarle,  to  whom  the  king  had  entrust- 
ed York,  and  two  other  loyal  men  came  against  him  with  a  few 
men,  and  fought  against  him  and  put  the  king  to  flight  at  the 
Standard.) 

With  has  now  usurped  the  whole  duty  of  mid  and  lost 
most  of  its  own.  It  has  its  original  meaning  as  a  prefix  in 
with\\.o\^  and  w^V^stand,  and  in  such  expressions  as  to  fight, 
strive,  quarrel,  or  go  to  law  with. 

If  English  nouns  had  distinctions  of  case  those  that  follow 
prepositions  would  be  in  the  objective,  as  they  are  indeed 
held  to  be  by  most  authorities.  It  must  be  admitted,  how- 
ever, that  the  objective  is  precisely  like  the  nominative.  The 
effect  of  the  preposition  is  only  seen  when  it  is  followed  by 
a  personal,  interrogative,  or  relative  pronoun, — before  me^ 
after  us,  for  him,  from  them,  with  whom, 

CONJUNCTIONS. 

A  conjunction  is  a  word  that  conjoins  or  connects.  Con- 
junctions so  often  connect  sentences,  or  what  may  readily  be 
developed  into  sentences,  that  it  has  sometimes  been  held 
that  they  invariably  have  that  office.  Mr.  Harris,  the  author 
of  "  Hermes,"  and  Dr.  Latham  are  probably  the  most  emi- 
nent advocates  of  that  view.  The  latter  says,  "  there  are 
always  two  propositions  where  there  is  one  conjunction  "  * ; 
but  the  statement,  I  think,  requires  limitation.  But  be  that 
as  it  may,  they  unite  into  a  continuous  whole  what  would 

'  "  English  L^guage,"  chap.  26. 


492  English  Grammar. 

otherwise  be  scattered  shreds  of  discourse,  not  only  connect- 
ing the  parts  but  showing  their  relation  to  each  other ;  that 
some  ideas  agree  with  and  support  each  other ;  that  some 
are  opposites  ;  that  one  is  to  another  as  cause  or  effect ;  that 
they  are  really  consistent,  though  apparently  inconsistent ; 
or  they  carry  with  them  many  other  implications. 

Conjunctions  unite  two  or  more  distinct  sentences  into 
one,  as  in  the  following  quotations  in  which  all  the  parts  are 
fully  expressed. 

"  No  doubt  but  ye  are  the  people,  and  wisdom  shall  die  with 
you." — Job  xii.,  2. 

"  The  wind  comes  from  the  desert,  but  there  is  no  sound  in 
thy  leaves." — Ossian. 

"  Though  the  fields  of  our  battles  were  dark  and  silent,  our 
fame  is  in  the  four  gray  stones." — Id. 

"  The  time  of  the  event  was  accurately  ascertained,  and  the 
family  hung  in  trembling  suspense,  as  the  minister  of  heaven 
cast  the  horoscope  of  the  infant." 

Prescott  :  "  Conq.  of  Mex.,"  i.,  4. 

Here,  although  everything  is  expressed  in  full,  one  member 
of  a  sentence  repeats  nothing  contained  in  another.  But 
where  the  simpler  conjunctions  are  used  there  is  generally 
something  common  to  tvvo  or  more  members,  which  is  ex- 
pressed only  in  one. 

"  Houses  are  built  to  live  in,  and  not  to  look  on." 

Bacon  :  *'  Essay,"  45. 

If  the  second  member  were  fully  expressed  it  would  be 

"  houses  are  not  built  to  look  on." 

Thus  what  is  identical  in  the  two  members  is  suppressed  in 
one  of  them.  Nearly  the  whole  is  sometimes  suppressed  on 
account  of  identity,  there  being  only  one  little  word  different. 

The  ship  was  driven  to  and  fro. 

This,  if  expanded  into  two  propositions,  would  be : 

The  ship  was  driven  to  and  (the  ship  was  driven)  fro. 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjuncliofis.        493 

When  the  subject  or  object  is  two  individuals,  acting  or 
acted  upon  together  and  united  by  and,  the  sentence  cannot 
always  be  decomposed  into  two  propositions  without  com- 
pletely recasting  it. 

"  This  dog  and  man  at  first  were  friends." 

If  this  were  developed  into  : 

This  dog  at  first  were  friends, 
and 

This  man  at  first  were  friends, 

it  would  be  very  like  nonsense.  The  same  might  be  said  of — 

She  mixed  wine  and  oil  together. 

The  mother  and  daughter  embraced  each  other. 

It  is  evident  then  that  and  does  not  always  connect  separate 
propositions. 

Much  may  be  said  without  conjunctions ;  and  primitive 
peoples  employ  few.  If  we  used  none,  our  discourse  would 
be  like  a  dry-stone  wall,  without  mortar  to  cement  the  pieces. 
Such  is  the  style  of  the  poems  attributed  to  Ossian. 

"  I  stood  in  the  darkness  of  my  strength.  Toscar  drew  his 
sword  at  my  side.  The  foe  came  on  like  a  whirlwind.  The 
mingled  sound  of  death  arose.  Man  took  man  ;  shield  met 
shield  ;  steel  mixed  its  beams  with  steel  ;  darts  hiss  through  air ; 
swords  on  broken  bucklers  bound.  Like  the  sound  of  an  aged 
grove  when  a  thousand  ghosts  break  the  trees  by  night,  such  was 
the  din  of  arms.  But  Uthal  fell  beneath  my  sword  ;  the  sons  of 
Berathon  fled."  * 

There  are  only  three  words  that  the  English  student  need 
regard  as  primitive  and  exclusively  conjunctions.  The  re- 
mainder have  been  adopted  or  modified  from  other  known 
parts  of  speech,  especially  pronouns,  prepositions,  and  ad- 
verbs. From  pronouns,  we  have  either,  neither,  or,  nor^ 
hence,  however,  than,  that,  then,  therefore,  wherefore,  whence^ 
whereas,  whether,  why.  Many  words  are  sometimes  pronouns 
or  adverbs,    and  sometimes   conjunctions;    and    it  is  not 

'  Perhaps  not  quite  accurate,  quoted  from  memory  after  fifty  years. 


494  English  Grammar. 

always  possible  to  tell  in  a  given  instance  which  they  are. 
The  general  test  of  a  conjunction  is  that  it  unites  two 
propositions  or  phrases  without  being  a  part  of  either. 

We  called  {bu{)  there  was  no  answer. 

The  propositions  are  complete  in  themselves,  and  but  adds 
nothing  to  either ;  but  it  shows  a  relation  between  the  two — 
a  relation  we  may  say  of  disappointment.  The  conjunction 
is  not  necessarily  placed  between  the  related  propositions. 

{Although)  we  called,  there  was  no  answer. 

A  conjunction  differs  from  a  relative  pronoun  or  adverb, 
which  also  connects  propositions,  in  this  that  the  relative 
belongs  to  one  of  the  propositions,  and  the  conjunction 
does  not. 

This  is  Mr.  A.  B.  who  is  the  secretary  of  our  society. 
This  is  Mr.  A.  B.  {and)  he  is  the  secretary  of  our  society. 

Some  conjunctions  are  apt  to  go  in  pairs,  the  principal  of 
which  are 

as — as  as — so  both — and 

if — then  either — or  neither — nor 

whether — or  though — yet 

One  member  of  the  pair  can  generally  be  dispensed  with. 
It  is  a  question,  fortunately  not  an  important  one,  whether 
one  of  these  pairs  is  one  conjunction  or  two.  We  have 
seen  that  adverbial  and  prepositional  phrases  may  be  made 
up  of  two  or  more  words,  and  the  same  is  true  of  conjunc- 
tions. We  have  such  compound  expressions  as,  and  yet,  if 
however,  as  soon  as,  inasmuch  as,  now  therefore,  on  the  other 
hand.  Of  however  many  words  such  an  expression  may 
consist,  it  performs  the  work  of  a  single  conjunction,  and  so 
does  one  of  the  pairs  under  consideration. 

Grammarians  have  often  divided  conjunctions  into  a 
number  of  classes,  according  to  the  relations  which  they 
express  or  imply, — Copulatives,  Disjunctives,  Concessives, 
Continuatives,  Illatives,  etc.,  which  classification  seems  to 
me  to  serve  no  useful  purpose.     A  conjunction  not  only 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunclions.        495 

connects  but  indicates  the  character  of  the  connection.  It 
expresses  a  relation ;  and  to  tell  what  that  relation  is 
pertains  to  lexicography  rather  than  to  grammar. 

I  will  now  remark  briefly  on  a  few  of  the  conjunctions,  in 
regard  either  to  their  formation  or  use. 

Also,  originally  and  literally  all  so,  just  so,  exactly  so,  in 
the  very  same  manner.  Compare  the  Saxon  and  common 
version  of  Matt,  xxi.,  30 : 

"  Tha  cwaeth  he  eal  swa  to  tham  6thrum." 
(And  he  came  to  the  second  and  said  likewise^ 

It  is  used  to  tack  on  something  additional,  the  main 
statement  having  gone  before. 

Althoug^h — all  though — does  not  differ  in  meaning  from 
though,  one  of  our  most  primitive  conjunctions.  It  admits 
the  foregoing  proposition,  but  prepares  to  deny  the  con- 
sequences expected  to  follow.  It  is  often  followed  by  still 
QX  yet  as  a  correlative. 

"  Although  the  fig-tree  shall  not  blossom,  neither  shall  fruit  be 
in  the  vines,  *  *  *  yet  I  will  rejoice  in  the  Lord." — Hab.  iii., 
17- 

And  joins  only  things  that  are  grammatically  alike  and 
equivalent.  It  unites  nouns,  including  their  substitutes, 
pronouns,  or  adjectives,  verbs,  adverbs,  or  prepositions,  but 
it  does  not  unite  members  of  these  different  classes.  More- 
over it  is  the  only  conjunction  that  unites  parts  which  can- 
not be  construed  as  separate  propositions. 

Because  is  by  cause,  and  the  earlier  and  fuller  expression 
was  by  the  cause  that 

"  And  by  the  cause  that  they  sholde  ryse 
Eerly  for  to  seen  the  grete  fight 
Vn  to  her  reste  wen  ten  they  at  night." 

Chaucer  :  "  Knight's  Tale." 

But. — The  origin  of  this  word  as  a  preposition  has  been 
already  shown.     As  a  conjunction  it  introduces  something 


496  English  Grammar. 

opposite  to,  or  at  least  different  from,  what  has  been  said. 
But  here  is  a  distinction  between  opposition  and  difference. 
The  Greeks  expressed  the  former  by  aXka  and  the  latter  by 
6b  ;  and  the  barbarian  Goths  had  five  words  for  all  of  which 
we  have  only  but. 

Eke  is  scarcely  used  as  a  conjunction,  and,  like  several 
others,  never  goes  alone  in  prose,  but  follows  and : 

"  And  when  he  rood  men  might  his  bridel  heere 
Gyngle  in  a  whistlyng  wynd  so  cleere. 
And  eek  as  lowde  as  doth  the  chapel  belle." 

Chaucer  :  "  Prolog,  to  C.  T." 

"  A  train-band  captain  eke  was  he. 
Of  famous  London  town." 

CowPER  :  "  John  Gilpin." 

The  conjunction  is  the  same  word  as  the  verb  eke,  which  is 
but  little  used,  and  oftenest  in  such  expressions  as  to  eke 
out  a  scanty  meal.  In  Scotland  they  eke  garments,  pieces 
of  cloth,  and  broken  threads. 

Except  is  shortened  from  excepting. 

"It  was  a  fine  April  morning,  excepting  that  it  had  snowed 
hard  the  night  before." — Scott  :  "  Black  Dwarf,"  chap.  i. 

This  is  in  turn  a  mere  translation  of  the  native  English,  out- 
taking,  or  out-taken,  which  first  occurs  in  the  "  Cursor  Mundi  " 
about  1290. 

"  And  ye,  my  mooder,  my  souerayn  plesance 
Ouer  alle  thing,  out-taken  crist  on  lofte," 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 

Save  succeeded  to  the  place  of  out-take  : 

"  Thei  ben  fuUe  resonable     *    *    *    saf  that  thei  worschipen 
an  ox  for  here  god."  Mandeville. 

Like  all  or  most  prepositions  adopted  as  conjunctions,  except 
was  originally  and  properly  followed  by  that.  It  was  for- 
merly much  used  as  a  conjunction  : 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.       497 

"  Slack  not  thy  riding  except  I  bid  thee." 

2  Kings  iv.,  24. 

It  is  so  used  sixty-six  times  in  the  Bible,  and  unless  only 
eight  times.  At  present  the  prevailing,  and  I  think  better, 
practice  is  to  use  unless  exclusively  as  a  conjunction  and 
except  as  a  preposition. 

For  is  the  same  word  as  the  preposition  for.  It  is  an 
abbreviation  originating  in  A.-S.  '''for  tham  the"  meaning 
for  the  reason  that.     The  that  continued  long  to  be  used : 

"and  so  death  passed  upon  all  xaon  for  that  all  have  sinned." 

Rom.  v.,  12. 

"  Famed  Beauclerc  called,  for  that  he  loved 
The  minstrel,  and  his  lay  approved." 

If. — Home  Tooke's  plausible  conjecture  that  this  word — 
formerly  sometimes  written  gif—'ys>  the  imperative  of  give, 
proves  to  be  ill  founded,  as  the  Gothic,  Old  High  German, 
Old  Saxon,  and  Icelandic  are  without  g,  and  the  primary 
meaning  of  the  word  is  not  to  give  but  to  doubt, — Icel.  if 
uncertainty,  efa,  to  doubt.  Moreover  the  g  can  be  account- 
ed for.  The  Gothic  equivalent  was  iba  or  ibai,  but  to  this 
was  sometimes  prefixed  yah,  and,  making  yabai,  and  if ;  not 
that  it  was  written  with  y  but  rather  with  j.  Passing  into 
Old  Frisian  and  Anglo-Saxon  the  word  took  the  form  yV/"  or 
gef,  g  alternating  between  the  sounds  of  our  g  and  y.  If 
introduces  a  proposition  as  more  or  less  doubtful,  connected 
with  another  in  such  wise  that  if  the  first  holds  good,  so  does 
the  second  ;  if  the  first  fail,  the  second  will  fail  with  it. 

Now,  as  an  adverb  =  at  this  time ;  and  as  a  conjunction 
retains  something  of  the  same  meaning.  We  employ  it  when 
we  have  cleared  our  ground,  stated  our  premises,  and  are 
ready  to  bring  forward  our  conclusion,  or  make  an  important 
advance  in  a  continuous  argument.  Joseph,  after  briefly 
reciting  certain  facts,  sums  up  : 

"  So  now  it  was  not  you  that  sent  me  hither,  but  God." 

Gen.  xlv.,  7. 


49^  English  Grammar. 

and  the  eloquent  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  pre- 
pares to  conclude  a  long  argument  by  saying : 

"  Now^  of  the  things  that  have  been  spoken  this  is  the  sum." 

A  presidential  proclamation  is  prefaced  by  a  statement 
headed  by  the  word,  **  Whereas,"  and  prepares  for  real  busi- 
ness with,  ^^  Now  therefore."  Now  is  also  employed  in  de- 
bate to  show  that  an  opponent  has  omitted  an  important 
point. 

"  In  Matt,  xxiii.,  35,  we  have  the  following  passage  *  *  *  ; 
*  That  upon  you  may  come  all  the  righteous  blood  shed  upon  the 
earth,  from  the  blood  of  righteous  Abel  unto  the  blood  of  Zacharias, 
son  of  Barachias,  whom  ye  slew  between  the  temple  and  the  altar.' 
Now  two  Zachariases  are  recorded  in  history  as  having  been  thus 
slain."  Gregg  :  "  Creed  of  Christendom,"  chap.  8. 

Lest  is  not  a  shortening  of  least,  but  is  in  part  from  less. 
It  is  an  abbreviation  of  A.-S.  "  thy  1(Es  the,'' — the  less  for  this 
reason  that — in  which  thy  is  the  instrumental  case  of  the 
demonstrative  pronoun  =  for  this  =  for  this  reason — and 
the  a  relative  pronoun  : 

"  Ic  hine  ondraede  the  Ices  the  he  cume  and  ofsled  thas  mothra 
mid  heora  cildum." 

(I  dread  him  test  he  come  and  slay  the  mother  with  her  children.) 

Gen.  xxxii.,  1 1. 

The  first  part  of  the  expression  was  early  dropped,  leaving 
IcBS  the,  which  gradually  shrunk  to  les  the,  leste,  lest. 

"  Hii  habbeth  of  oure  londe  al  thane  north  ende,  and  we  beoth 
adrad  sore  teste  he  habbe  nou  more." 

(He  has  of  our  land  all  the  north  end,  and  we  be  sore  adread 
lest  he  now  have  more.)  Layamon. 

Or  is  an  abbreviation  of  other ;  nor  is  the  same  with  the 
negative  n  prefixed. 

Since  like  as,  inasmuch  as,  whereas,  because,  for,  introdu- 
ces a  reason  for  some  act  or  belief.  Like  other  conjunctions 
originally  prepositions  it  was  formerly  followed  by  that. 


Adverbs,  Prepositions^  and  Conjunctions.        499 

"  How  else  !  since  thai  the  heart's  unbiassed  instinct 
Impelled  me  to  the  daring  deed." 

Coleridge  :  "  Piccol."  iv.,  4. 

Still  and  yet  as  adverbs  express  continuance  of  time,  often 
conveying  a  hint  that  the  time  is  felt  to  be  rather  long.  As 
conjunctions  they  are  introduced  in  showing  that  arguments, 
actions,  good  or  bad,  successes,  or  failures  have  failed  to 
produce  the  efTect  expected,  and  that  some  person  or  thing 
continues  unchanged.  You  may  some  time  present  a  topic 
dear  to  your  heart,  with  the  demonstrative  clearness  of 
Euclid,  and  as  much  eloquence  as  you  can  work  in,  and  then 
be  answered  somewhat  in  this  style  : 

"  I  admit  that  you  have  stated  your  side  of  the  case  very 
forcibly  ;  and  if  there  were  no  other  considerations  it  would 
look  quite  plausible.  I  don't  pretend  to  argue  the  subject  just 
now  ;  still  I  cannot  but  believe  that,"  etc.,  etc.,  etc. 

And  that  is  all  you  get  for  your  pains. 

Than  and  then  are  variations  of  the  same  word.  The 
first  is  the  most  primitive  in  form,  the  second  in  signification. 
Shakespeare  and  earlier  writers  make  no  consistent  distinc- 
tion between  the  two.  Than  is  used  in  comparing  two 
things  or  classes ;  and  we  are  to  remember  that  the  com- 
parative degree  is  dual,  referring  only  to  two.  Hence  if  we 
say  "  gold  is  heavier  "  and  go  no  farther,  we  do  in  effect  say 
that  of  two  things  gold  is  the  heavier.  We  may  afterwards 
add,  "  then  silver,"  or  "  than  silver."  Then  is  employed  in 
drawing  a  sudden  conclusion  from  something  said  or  done. 

Bru.     "  You  are  my  true  and  honorable  Wife, 
As  deere  to  me  as  are  the  ruddy  droppes 
That  visit  my  sad  heart." 

For.     "  If  this  were  true,  then  should  I  know  this  secret." 
Shakesp.  :  "Julius  Caesar,"  act  ii. 

An  example  vastly  inferior  in  dignity,  but  more  apposite,  is 
afforded  by  the  «/^r>/  simple  lines : 


500  English  Grammar. 

"  *  What  is  your  fortune,  my  pretty  maid  ? ' 

*  My  face  is  my  fortune,  Sir,'  she  said. 

*  Then,  I  '11  not  have  you,  my  pretty  maid.*  " 

That,  originally  a  demonstrative  pronoun,  not  only  be- 
came one  of  the  most  common  of  conjunctions,  but  helped 
to  make  many  others.  Prepositions — after,  before,  besides, 
since,  till,  notwitlistanding — became  conjunctions  by  being 
set  before  that,  and  retaining  their  places  when  it  had 
disappeared. 

"  Now  after  that  men  han  visited  the  holy  places,  thanne  will 
thei  tumen  toward  Jerusalem."  Mandeville. 

In  like  manner  that  was  formerly  placed  and  is  now  omitted, 
after  if,  because,  lest,  though,  while,  and  other  words  that 
never  were  prepositions. 

One  of  Home  Tooke's  acutest  conjectures  has  reference 
to  the  use  of  that  as  a  conjunction. 

"  B. —  *  *  *  Has  tj^g  Conjunction  that,  any  the  smallest 
correspondence  or  similarity  of  signification  with  that,  the 
Article  or  Pronoun  ? 

*'  H. — In  my  opinion  the  word  that  (call  it  as  you  please,  either 
Article  or  Pronoun,  or  Conjunction)  retains  always  one  and  the 
same  signification.  Unnoticed  abbreviation  in  construction  and 
difference  of  position  have  caused  this  appearance  of  fluctuation  ; 
and  misled  the  grammarians  of  all  languages,  both  ancient  and 
modem,  for  in  all  they  make  the  same  mistake.  Pray,  answer 
me  a  question.  Is  it  not  strange  and  improper  that  we  should, 
without  any  reason  or  necessity,  employ  in  English  the  same 
word  for  two  different  meanings  and  purposes  ? 

**B. —  I  think  it  wrong  :  and  I  see  no  reason  for  it,  but  many 
reasons  against  it. 

"  H. — Well  !  Then  is  it  not  more  strange  that  this  same  impro- 
priety, in  this  same  case,  should  run  through  all  languages  ? 
And  that  they  should  all  use  an  Article  without  any  reason, 
unnecessarily,  and  improperly,  for  this  same  Conjunction  with 
which  it  has,  as  you  say,  no  correspondence  nor  similarity  of 
signification  ? 

«'*     *     *     Examine  any  languages  you  please  and  see  whether 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.        501 

they  also,  as  well  as  the  English,  have  not  a  supposed  Conjunction 
which  they  employ  as  we  do  that  j  and  which  is  the  same  word 
as  their  supposed  Article  or  Pronoun.  Does  not  this  look  as  if  there 
was  some  reason  for  employing  the  Article  in  this  manner  ? 

"  B. — The  appearances,  I  own,  are  strongly  in  favour  of  your 
opinion.     But  how  shall  we  find  out  what  that  connection  is  ? 

"  H. — Suppose  we  examine  some  instances  ;  and,  still  keeping 
the  same  signification  of  the  sentences,  try  whether  we  cannot, 
by  a  resolution  of  their  construction,  discover  what  we  want. 

"  Example. — *  I  wish  you  to  believe  that  I  would  not  wilfully 
hurt  a  fly.' 

"  Resolution. — '  I  would  not  wilfully  hurt  a  fly  ;  I  wish  you  to 
believe  that  [assertion].' " 

This  view  has  the  powerful  support  of  Bopp,  so  far  as  the 
German  language  is  concerned  ;  but  both  writers  have  neg- 
lected to  give  any  actual  examples  illustrating  the  trans- 
formation of  the  second  of  the  above  forms  into  the  first. 

It  is  an  interesting  fact  that  many  languages  form  this 
conjunction  from  a  pronoun  ;  but  then  pronouns  are  a  fruit- 
ful source  of  adverbs  and  conjunctions  generally.  This 
adoption  is  not  confined  to  the  Aryan  languages,  but  is 
found  also  in  Hebrew,  and,  according  to  Gesenius,  in  Ara- 
maic and  Ethiopic.  Hebrew  has  two  relative  (not  demon- 
strative) pronouns — chi  and  asher — which  also  do  duty  for 
the  conjunction  that.  The  Hebrew  scholar  scarcely  needs  to 
be  reminded  of  the  oft-repeated  formula  : 

"  vaiiare  Elohim  chi  tob." 
(And  God  saw  that  [it  was]  good.) 

For  the  similar  use  of  asher  we  may  instance  2  Sam.  xi.,  20 : 

'*  y'da'tem  eth  asher  yoru  meal  hakhomah." 
(Ye  know  that  they  shoot  from  the  wall.) 

To  show  the  use  of  this  conjunction  by  a  single  example 
from  several  Aryan  languages  I  select  the  Greek,  Latin, 
Gothic,  Anglo-Saxon,  English,  Russian,  and  German  versions 
of  the  first  part  of  Matt,  v.,  17 : 


502  English  Grammar. 

Mrf  vofxiarftE  on  rjkdov  HaTaXvffai  tor  vopiov 
Ne  existimate  me  venisse  ut  dissolvam  legem. 
Ne  hugyaith  ei  qemyau  gatairan  witoth. 
Nelle  ge  w^nan  thcet  ic  come  towurpan  tha  ae. 
Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law. 
Ne  dumaite  chto  Ya  prished  parushit  zakon. 
Ihr  soUt  nicht  wahnen,  dass  ich  gekomraen  bin  das  Gesetz  *  *  * 
aufzulosen. 


Still,  the  dictum  that  the  pronoun  corresponding  to  the 
English  that  becomes  a  conjunction  in  ALL  is  stated  too 
broadly.  In  the  first  place  it  fails  entirely  in  Arabic,  Irish, 
and  Magyar,  and  probably  in  many  other  languages  equally 
unknown  to  Mr.  Home  Tooke  and  the  present  writer.  In 
the  second  place  the  conjunction  is  not  from  the  demonstra- 
tive but  from  the  relative  pronoun. 

There  were  in  Sanskrit  three  pronouns  which,  divested  of 
all  irregularities  and  reduced  to  their  simplest  terms,  were 
interrog.  ka,  demonst.  ta,  and  relat.  ya  ;  or  adding  a  letter 
that  was  an  almost  invariable  part,  kad,  tad,  and  yad.  Now 
of  the  relative  yad  only  doubtful  traces  are  left  in  any 
Western  branch  of  the  great  Aryan  family,  and  never  as 
a  pronoun.  Relatives  had  to  be  borrowed.  The  Latin,  the 
Slavonic,  and,  it  is  asserted  on  good  authority,  the  Lithu- 
anian used  the  interrogative  as  a  relative ;  the  Teutonic 
branch  alone  preferred  the  demonstrative,  but  at  a  com- 
paratively late  date  adopted  the  interrogative  also.  Hence 
it  is  that  we  can  say  :  "  the  man  that  laughs,"  and  "  the  man 
who  laughs  "  ;  but  the  latter  is  not  older  than  the  Reforma- 
tion. But  the  Teutonic  tongues  had  yet  another  relative,  an 
indeclinable  particle,  perhaps  remotely  derived  from  a  de- 
monstrative. In  Gothic  it  was  ei,  which  we  have  seen  used 
as  a  conjunction.  It  was  generally  connected  with  its  ante- 
cedent— ik-ei,  I  who,  thu-ei,  thou  who,  thata-ei,  that  which. 
Now  this  thata-ei,  usually  shortened  to  thatei,  was  the  com- 
mon Gothic  conjunction  =  that.  Icelandic  had  two  such 
particles,  ancient  es,  modern  er,  and  sem,  both  of  which  were 
relatives  and  conjunctions.     Anglo-Saxon  had  also  two  inde- 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.        503 

clinable  relatives,  as  and  the  (see  page  328).  This  particular 
as  is  probably  akin  to  the  particle  ei,  and  es  or  er  just  cited — 
a  relative  pronoun  turned  relative  conjunction.  The  was  no 
doubt  originally  a  demonstrative  pronoun,  but  known  to  us 
as  an  indeclinable  relative  : 

"Wrecce  men  sturven  of  hungear,  sume  ieden  on  selmes  the 
waren  sum  wile  rice  men." 

(Wretched  men  starved  of  hunger,  some  went  to  beggary  who 
some  time  were  rich  men.)  "  Saxon  Chronicle." 

We  also  find  it  as  a  conjunction  : 

"  Mid  almyhtyes  godes  luue,  vte  we  vs  werie, 
With  theos  wrecche  worldes  luue,  the  heo  vs  ne  derye."  * 
(With  Almighty  God's  love,  let  us  guard  ourselves 
Against  this  wretched  world's  love,  that  it  harm  us  not.) 

Next  we  find  this  particle  connected  with  the  true  demon- 
strative, which  for  sake  of  distinction  I  shall  here  render  this 
— -for  tham  the,  vith  tham  the,  cer  tham  the,  (sfter  tham  the* 
These  phrases  may  be  rendered  :  for  this,  that — i.  e.,  for  this 
reason,  that ;  contrary  to  this,  that.  One  step  farther  and 
we  find  this  relative  the  and  the  neuter  singular  of  the 
demonstrative,  that,  mistaken  for  each  other — for  thy  t/uety 
thurh  thcet  thczt.  In  some  such  way,  through  ignorance  and 
carelessness,  tJtat  came  to  take  the  place  of  the  indeclinable 
relative  and  conjunction. 

How  this  relative  pronoun  became  a  conjunction  at  first  I 
do  not  know ;  but  a  possible  manner  of  transition  may  be 
made  more  conceivable  by  an  example  or  two  from  other 
languages,  where  the  relative  occurs,  as  an  adverb  =  how,  or 
as  a  conjunction  =  that. 

"  Docebat  etiam  *  *  *  ut  omni  tempore  totius  Galliae 
principatum  ^dui  tenuissent." 

'  Morris's  "  Specimens  of  Early  English,"  i.,  216. 
*  Matzner's  "  Englische  Grammatik,"  iii.,  427. 


504  English  Grammar. 

(He  also  explained  *  *  *  how  (or  tha{)  the  ^dluans  had 
always  held  the  leadership  of  all  Gaul.) 

CiESAR  :  "  Bel.  Gal.,"  i.,  43. 

"  v'atta  higgadta  haiiom  eth  tzj^(?r-asithah  itti  tobah." 
(And  thou  hast  showed  this  day  how  that  thou  hast  dealt  well 
with  me.)  i  Sam.  xxiv.,  18. 

Unless  was  formerly  written  onles  or  onlesse — that  is,  on  less. 
Home  Took  says  that  Tyndale  was  one  of  the  first  to  write 
this  word  with  u  and  that  the  great  importance  and  merit  of 
his  works  gave  currency  to  the  corruption.  The  meaning 
seems  to  be,  "  on  a  less  condition  "  "  on  easier  terms,"  the 
event  referred  to  will  not  take  place.  The  phrase  requires 
than  to  complete  it. 

"  But  that  may  not  be  upon  lesse  than  wee  now  falle  toward 
hevene  fro  the  erthe."  Mandeville. 

The  on  was  sometimes  omitted 

"  I  xal  him  down  dynge 
Lesse  than  he  at  my  byddynge 
Be  buxom  to  min  honde." 

**  Townley  Mysteries,"  a.d.  1430. 

"  Gif  he 
Commyttis  any  tresoun,  suld  he  not  de  ; 
Less  than  his  prince  of  grete  humanite 
Perdoun  his  fault  for  his  long  trew  service  ? " 

Gawin  Douglas. 

Than  was  changed  to  that. 

"  I  xal  forfare,  ffor  to  grete  synnys  that  I  have  do. 
Less  thai  my  lord  God  sumdel  spare." 

"  Townley  Mysteries." 

Lastly,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  that  was  omitted. 

Why,  originally  the  instrumental  case  of  who,  as  a  conjunc- 
tion begins  a  reply.  If  the  answer  be  not  ready  at  hand,  it 
expresses  doubt  and  hesitation  ;  oftener  it  expresses  indig- 
nant surprise.  . 


Adverbs,  Prepositions,  and  Conjunctions.        505 

"  Why,  in  that  elder  day,  to  be  a  Roman 
Was  greater  than  a  King." 

Miss  Mitford, 

Many  years  ago,  during  the  excitement  over  the  capture  and 
return  of  the  slave  Burns,  Theodore  Parker  in  one  of  his 
addresses,  burst  forth  indignantly  with  : 

"  Why,  his  countrymen  were  bishops  of  Hippo  and  Carthage." 


CHAPTER  IX. 
SYNTAX. 

All  agree  that  the  second  important  part  of  grammar  is 
SYNTAX.  The  word  means  literally  placing  together  in 
order.  The  Greek  Syntaxis  was  primarily  a  military  term, 
and  related  to  the  placing  of  men  and  different  bodies  of 
troops  preparatory  to  a  battle.  But  when  the  term  is 
transferred  to  the  marshalling  of  words,  that  part  which 
relates  to  placing  them  is  in  a  great  measure  lost  sight  of. 
The  reason  is  easily  understood  when  we  reflect  that  our 
grammar  is  an  inheritance  from  the  Greeks  and  Romans 
whose  words  were  as  mutable  as  Proteus,  and  assumed  as 
many  disguises.  The  question  with  them  was  not  where  to 
place  their  words,  but  what  forms  to  give  them.  And  although 
the  forms  of  English  words  are  few  and  seldom  mistakable, 
and  their  relations  to  each  other  determined  largely  by  posi- 
tion, grammarians  have  almost  entirely  ignored  these  facts, 
and  under  the  head  of  Syntax  have  treated  of  the  forms 
and  not  the  placing  of  the  words. 

The  difference  between  Greek  and  Latin  on  the  one  side 
and  English  on  the  other,  how  imperious  were  the  demands 
of  form  with  them,  and  how  important  position  is  to  us,  will 
be  seen  by  a  single  example  : 

Hie  venator  juvenis  ilium  ursum  nigrum  occidit. 
This  young  hunter  killed  that  black  bear. 

There  are  seven  words  in  each  version,  and  to  change  the 
form  of  one  in  the  Latin  or  the  position  of  any  but  one  in 
the  English  would  alter  or  impair  the  sense.  The  Latin 
words  might  be  arranged   5,040  different   ways,  while  the 

506 


Syntax,  507 

English  would  admit  of  only  one  change.  We  might  say, 
"  The  hunter  young,"  but  every  one  would  recognize  that 
as  belonging  rather  to  the  style  of  poetry  than  of  plain 
prose.  A  greater  freedom  of  arrangement  then  is  practised 
by  the  poet  than  by  the  prose-writer.  It  is  a  part  of  what 
is  called  poetic  license,  and  has  no  other  limit  than  the 
necessity  of  being  intelligible,  which  limit  is  perhaps  some- 
times passed.  But  he  who  speaks  or  writes  English  prose 
must  pursue  a  straight  and  narrow  path  compared  with  one 
whose  words  may  assume  a  thousand  forms,  or  be  arranged 
in  a  thousand  different  ways.  Still  we  may  find  that  there 
are  compensating  advantages,  and  that  the  principles  of  our 
language  forbid  our  doing  only  those  things  that  would  be 
of  no  advantage. 

Of  that  part  of  syntax  that  prescribes  the  forms  that 
words  shall  bear  in  certain  connections,  much  is  necessarily 
taught  under  the  head  of  Etymology  in  exhibiting  the 
forms  themselves.  Nearly  all  that  I  have  deemed  proper  to 
say  on  that  subject  has  been  already  said.  Much  of  the  re- 
mainder that  is  usually  presented  as  syntax  consists  merely 
of  names  and  definitions  for  various  arrangements  of  words, 
which  no  one  is  much  the  wiser  for  knowing.  What  remains 
to  be  said  on  what  are  called  "  Concord  and  Government " 
will  be  introduced  when  required  in  the  general  discussion 
on  the  selection  and  placing  of  words.  It  is  hoped  that  the 
young  and  ingenious  reader  will  find  interest  and  advantage 
in  following  a  line  of  thought  somewhat  different  from  that 
of  the  common  text-books. 

No  one  will  question  the  importance  of  selecting  appro- 
priate words  ;  but  the  equal  importance  of  arrangement  will 
be  seen  by  dislocating  the  words  of  a  sentence,  thus : 

"  Whoever  makes  not  this  one  kind  of  easy  argument  to  de- 
ceive the  physical  elements  of  some  back  sciences  should  learn 
more  the  use  of  intending  to  be  sent." — "  Mill's  Logic." 

Whatever  might  be  done  if  the  language  were  Latin,  it  is 
doubtful  if  any  one  could  restore  sense  to  a  long  English 
sentence  thus  dismembered.     But  be  the  language  what  it 


5o8  English  Grammar, 

may,  it  is  clear  that  such  dismemberment  adds  to  the  diffi- 
culty of  understanding. 

There  is  only  one  fundamental  principle  governing  the 
location  of  words,  which  is,  that  words  which  limit,  explain, 
or  complement  each  other  should  be  placed  near  together. 
It  is  equally  applicable  to  all  languages,  but  not  equally 
imperative.  It  is  not  strictly  followed  by  any  that  I  am 
acquainted  with.  Suppose  we  had  occasion  to  speak  of  an 
"  opening  rose,"  but  instead  of  placing  the  two  words  to- 
gether, we  should  interpose  thirty  or  forty  other  words, 
relating  to  various  matters,  it  would  then  require  considera- 
ble mental  effort  to  disentangle  the  idea  of  an  "  opening  rose." 
Now  this  kind  of  displacement  is  of  frequent  occurrence. 

^^  Inventus  aut  qui  vitam  excoluere  per  artes." 

^neid  vi.,  663. 

The  first  and  last  words  are  more  closely  connected  in  ex- 
pressing the  import  of  the  line  than  any  others  in  it. 
Again,  in  the  line  of  Propertius : 

"  Nee  levis  in  verbis  est  medicina  meis." 

levis  belongs  with  medicina,  and  verbis  with  meis.  Of  two 
closely  connected  words  it  may  matter  little  which  comes 
first  or  last ;  but  it  helps  the  understanding  greatly  to  find 
them  together.  I  have  before  me  a  sentence  from  an  Eng- 
lish author  who  has  had  a  wide  popularity  for  more  than  a 
century ;  and  in  that  sentence  a  verb  and  its  immediate  ob- 
ject are  separated  by  ninety-four  words.  A  private  pension 
act  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress  directs  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  "  to  place  on  the  pension  roll,  at  the  rate  of  fifteen 
dollars  per  month,  *  *  *  subject  to  the  provisions  and 
limitations  of  the  pension  laws."  In  good  composition 
nothing  more  than  a  comma  would  intervene  between 
"  month  "  and  "  subject  " ;  but  in  reality  there  are  eighty- 
two  words.  The  Germans  have  probably  carried  to  a 
greater  degree  of  perfection  than  any  other  people  the  art  of 
putting  asunder  things  nearly  related.  They  will  not  only 
separate  words  closely  connected,  but,  like  the  American 


Syntax.  509 

Indians,  they  will  cut  a  word  in  two,  and  put  a  long  discus- 
sion between  the  parts. 

"  Jle  (i)  had  several  older  brothers  ;  and  was,  (2)  since  the  pos- 
sessions of  the  family  an  inheritance  for  the  oldest  formed,  and 
he  himself  sorely  against  the  custom  and  the  tradition  of  his  race, 
through  great  learning-fondness  and  a  decided  inclination  to  a 
quiet  contemplative  life  devoted,  for  the  diplomatic  service  (4) 
through  the  persuasion  of  his  mother,  a  beautiful,  gentle,  sickly 
lady,  who  in  the  solitude  of  the  ancestral  castle  of  Tissow  the 
most  brilliant  gifts  with  which  she  upon  a  far  grander  theatre  had 
shine  can,  unused  or  almost  unused,  go-to-waste  let  must  destined 
become  (3)." 

The  thread  of  the  story  runs  through  the  italicized  passages 
in  the  order  of  the  numbers.  The  labor  of  sifting  out  the 
essential  atoms  and  putting  them  together  is  as  real  to  the 
German  as  it  would  be  to  us,  although  long  use  has  made 
him  less  conscious  of  it. 

There  are  three  peculiar  words  in  our  language,  yes,  no, 
and  amen.  Each  of  them  is  a  symbol  that  stands  for  a  sen- 
tence, and  is  incapable  of  combining  with  other  words  to 
form  one.  They  are  holophrasts,  and  not  parts  of  speech  in 
the  same  sense  as  other  words  are. 

With  the  exception  of  these  three,  no  other  word  expresses 
a  complete  meaning  when  standing  alone.  A  verb  used  im- 
peratively— come,  halt — comes  the  nearest  to  it ;  but  there 
must  be  some  one  to  "  come  "  or  "  halt  "  ;  and,  if  the  com- 
mand were  given  in  full,  a  noun  or  pronoun  would  accom- 
pany the  verb.  A  sufficient  number  of  words  put  together 
to  express  a  complete  meaning  make  a  sentence.  Our 
speech  and  writing  are  made  up  of  sentences.  Of  these 
there  are  several  kinds.  They  may  be  divided  into  classes 
in  various  ways  on  a  variety  of  different  principles.  One 
obvious  way  of  dividing  them  is  into  Declarative,  Interroga- 
tive, and  Imperative. 

"  Ireland  is  an  island,"  makes  a  statement  as  of  a  fact. 

"  When  will  the  moon  be  full  ?  "  asks  a  question. 

"  Open  the  window,"  gives  a  command. 


5IO  English  Grammar. 

The  last  two  forms  might  indeed  be  dispensed  with,  and  we 
might  say : 

I  desire  to  know  when  the  moon  will  be  fulL 
I  desire  you  to  open  the  window, 

thus  making  all  sentences  declarative,  as  by  far  the  greater 
part  are.     It  is  with  them  that  we  shall  be  chiefly  occupied. 
Every  complete  sentence  contains  at  least  two  elements. 
One  of  the  simplest  possible  sentences  is, 

Bears  hibernate. 

Something  is  mentioned — "  bears  " — and  something  is  told 
about  them — that  they  "  hibernate  " ;  and  these  two  ele- 
ments are  indispensable.  The  first  is  called  the  subject — 
the  thing  spoken  about ;  the  second  is  called  the  predicate 
— the  thing  declared  or  said.  The  subject  is  generally  a 
noun,  but  it  may  be  a  pronoun,  or  indeed  it  may  be  any 
word  or  set  of  words  that  can  be  used  as  a  noun  for  the  oc- 
casion. The  predicate,  limited  to  a  single  word,  is  always  a 
verb,  expressing  an  action  or  condition  limited  to  the  sub- 
ject and  not  affecting  any  other  person  or  thing.  Of  such 
verbs  fall,  sit,  sleep,  walk,  laugh,  sneeze  are  examples.  But 
the  greater  number  of  verbs  express  actions  affecting  some 
second  person  or  thing — catch,  hold,  lift,  make,  fasten,  etc. 
What  is  thus  acted  upon  is  called  the  object,  A  third  class 
of  verbs  do  not  express  an  action  exercised  upon  anything, 
and  yet  require  to  be  supplemented  by  some  other  words  in 
order  to  make  sense.  Verbs  that  in  any  way  signify  to  be, 
become,  seem  or  be  called  are  of  this  class,  and  grammarians 
are  pleased  to  call  them  by  the  awful  title  of  "  Verbs  of  In- 
complete Predication."  In  such  cases  the  verb  is  called  a 
copula — a  mere  coupling,  or  connecting  link  ;  and  the  supple- 
mentary words  are  regarded  as  the  predicate,  or  thing  as- 
serted. Judged,  then,  by  the  part  they  play  in  sentences, 
verbs  are  of  three  kinds — first,  those  that  tell  their  own  story ; 
second,  those  that  express  an  action  upon  something ;  and 
third,  those  that  connect  somewhat  in  the  manner  of  the 
algebraic  signs  =  <. 


Syntax.  511 

The  verb  can  be  recognized  by  its  meaning,  whatever  its 
grammatical  form,  or  however  it  may  be  placed  ;  but  the 
subject  and  object  may  be  mistaken  for  each  other.  To 
obviate  this,  a  method  that  has  prevailed  very  widely,  is  to 
attach  to  one  or  both  certain  prefixes  or  suffixes  that  would 
distinguish  them  wherever  they  might  be  placed.  In  prac- 
tice this  method  had  the  serious  drawback  that  it  was  seldom 
carried  out  thoroughly,  and  a  multitude  of  words  were  left 
indistinguishable.  Moreover,  in  a  very  long  sentence,  as  we 
have  seen,  words  might  be  separated  far  from  their  partners, 
and  the  reader  or  hearer  would  have  to  retain  them  in  mind 
and  keep  on  the  outlook  for  other  words  to  fit  them. 
We  have  almost  wholly  abandoned  that  method,  retaining  it 
only  in  the  case  of  a  few  pronouns.  We  rely  upon  the 
position  of  the  words,  the  normal  order  being  Subject,  Verb, 
Object.  This  order  is  sometimes  departed  from  in  legal 
documents,  poetry,  and  the  Bible,  all  formed  upon  archaic 
patterns. 

"  God  and  his  son  except, 
Created  thing  naught  feared  he."  — Milton. 

Where  words  are  few  and  simple  any  order  agreed  upon 
and  understood  serves  perfectly  well ;  but  in  long  and  intri- 
cate sentences  the  order  of  arrangement  may  become  im- 
portant. Is  there  any  natural  principle  determining  the  best 
order?  Herbert  Spencer,  in  an  essay  on  the  philosophy  of 
style,  lays  down  two  leading  principles.  The  first  is  that  the 
best  arrangement  is  that  which  requires  the  least  effort  on 
the  part  of  the  reader  or  hearer  in  order  to  understand  and 
appreciate  it.  This  principle  is  beyond  dispute,  but  it  does 
not  go  very  far.  The  second,  which  is  more  questionable,  is 
that  details  and  circumstances  should  precede  the  essential 
words.  The  philosophical  author  seems  to  think  that  when 
the  word  horse,  for  example,  is  seen  or  heard,  there  is  formed 
in  the  mind  a  picture  of  the  animal,  complete  in  every  way, 
of  a  certain  age,  size,  color,  and  attitude,  grazing,  standing 
in  a  stable,  or  otherwise  employed.  When  any  of  these  cir- 
cumstances are  afterwards  given,  the  chances  are  largely  that 


512  English  Grammar. 

the  preconceived  picture  turns  out  to  be  incorrect,  and  has 
to  be  erased,  as  it  were,  and  a  new  one  formed.  This  process 
has  to  be  repeated  as  each  new  feature  is  added,  and  the 
successive  corrections  involve  mental  labor.  It  is  argued 
that  if  the  details  were  given  first  no  picture  would  be 
formed  until  the  mind  was  in  possession  of  all  the  materials. 
To  all  this  I  am  unable  to  assent.  I  am  not  conscious  of 
forming,  on  hearing  names,  mental  images  that  require  such 
continued  erasure  or  alteration.  For  ought  that  I  can  see, 
they  may  be  but  faint  and  colorless  outlines  that  are  rendered 
more  distinct  and  definite  by  each  successive  touch.  On  the 
other  hand,  to  gather  up  and  carry  forward  a  multitude  of 
details  without  knowing  what  is  to  be  done  with  them 
involves  considerable  mental  effort.  Let  us  suppose  a 
sentence  like  the  following,  which  is  one  of  the  simplest  of 
the  kind  : 

"  All  the  dismal  winter  night,  through  the  dark  and  dripping 
woods,  while  the  north  wind  sobbed  and  moaned,  shaking  the 
icicles  from  the  leafless  branches,  and  in  mournful  chorus  howled 
the  wolves  and  whooped  the  owls  from  their  hiding  in  the  hollow 
trees,  tramped  and  floundered,  fell  and  rose,  ever  pressing 
toward  the  Pontic  Sea,  the  cold  and  hungry,  ragged,  footsore, 
fugitive  Jew." 

Sentences  constructed  in  this  manner  might  be  well  cal- 
culated to  excite  attention  at  first,  to  see  what  was  coming ; 
but  weariness  would  soon  overcome  curiosity  ;  and,  if  per- 
sisted in,  they  would  be  resented  as  a  rhetorical  trick. 
Indeed,  Mr.  Spencer,  with  characteristic  candor  admits  that 
in  very  long  sentences  such  would  be  the  effect.  But  then 
a  principle  or  rule  is  of  little  value  if  it  fails  where  most 
needed. 

But,  whatever  may  be  theoretically  best,  the  rule  of  prece- 
dence in  English  is  as  stated  : 

Subject  Verb  Object 

or  at  least  the  first  two.  But  few  sentences  are  confined 
to   two   or   three   words.      These   may  become  centres   of 


Syntax.  513 

development  to  be  expanded  in  an  indefinite  number  of 
ways.  In  treating  of  them,  we  may  begin  with  the  subject, 
and  much  that  is  to  be  said  of  it  applies  equally  to  the 
object. 

The  subject  may  be  either  a  noun  or  a  pronoun,  and  it  is 
always  in  the  nominative  case  when  it  admits  of  such  a  dis- 
tinction, which,  however,  is  only  shown  in  a  few  pronouns. 

There  may  be  several  subjects,  not  merely  a  multitude  of 
individuals  represented  by  a  single  word,  and  therefore 
grammatically  single,  but  two  or  more  nouns  or  pronouns. 
We  may  say  not  only,  "  Children  love  play,"  but  also, 
"  Boys  and  girls  love  play." 

"  Then  went  up  Moses  and  Aaron  and  Nadab  and  Abihu  and 
seventy  of  the  elders  of  Israel." 

The  other  members  of  the  sentence  may  be  equally  com- 
posite. 

A  noun,  whether  subject  or  object,  may  be  accompanied 
by  an  adjective,  or  by  other  words  serving  the  same  pur- 
pose. Instead  of  the  unqualified  statement,  "  Boys  throw 
stones,"  we  may  say,  "  Bad  boys  throw  stones."  When  an 
adjective  is  thus  put  directly  along  with  a  noun,  it  is  said  by 
grammarians  to  be  used  attributively.  If  placed  alone  at 
the  other  end  of  the  sentence,  after  a  verb  of  being,  seeming, 
or  becoming — the  boys  are  bad — it  would  be  the  predicate, 
or  be  used  predicatively.  In  the  first  case  the  quality  is 
tacitly  assumed  ;  in  the  second,  expressly  declared.  The 
normal  place  of  the  adjective  is  before  the  noun  in  English, 
but  after  it  in  the  languages  of  the  Latin  stock.  In  some 
imitations  of  Latin  and  French,  and  often  in  poetrj^  it  is 
placed  after  the  noun.  A  noun  may  have  several  adjectives 
attached  to  it,  in  which  case  the  one  that  is  most  essential, 
permanent,  and  inherent  is  placed  nearest. 

A  poor  old  man  came  to  the  door. 

His  age  is  a  more  permanent,  essential,  characteristic  than 
his  poverty.     But  if  he  were    "a  poor  old  colored  man," 

his  color  would  stick  to  him  closer  than  either  age  or  penury. 

33 


514  English  Grammar. 

Professor  McGuffey,  of  Virginia,  used  to  illustrate  this 
point  by  the  difference  between  "  an  old  cocked  hat  "  and 
"  a  cocked  old  hat."  The  first  was  from  the  day  of  its  mak- 
ing a  hat  of  the  special  kind  known  as  a  cocked  hat,  which 
had  become  old.  The  other  was  an  old  hat  of  any  kind, 
that  through  accident  or  rough  usage  had  been  knocked  into 
a  cocked  hat.  It  is  upon  the  same  principle  that  adjective 
pronouns — a,  an,  the,  this,  some,  any,  several, — being  applica- 
ble always  and  to  everything,  are  placed  farther  from  the 
noun  than  any  real  adjective. 

A  curious  instance  of  misplacement  is  afforded  by  a  private 
act  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  which  alleges  that  Milo  Miner 
had  "  four  only  sons."  It  is  not  uncommon  to  have  only 
four  sons,  but  the  circumstance  of  having  a  number  of  only 
sons  perhaps  merited  preservation  in  permanent  form  as  a 
part  of  the  law  of  the  land. 

A  great  number  of  words  may  be  used  as  eithqr  nouns, 
adjectives,  or  verbs.  Participles  especially  partake  of  the 
adjective  character,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  possessive 
case  of  nouns.  The  dignity  of  a  senator  is  the  same  as 
senatorial  dignity.  A  long  series  of  words  may  be  used 
adjectively  before  a  single  noun.  An  act  of  Congress,  dated 
August  18,  1890,  specifies 

"  one  light  rapid  fire,  rapid  twist  six-pounder  breech-loading 
field  gun." 

Here  are  ten  words,  placed  as  adjectives  before  the  word 
^^ gun,"  and  three  of  them  are  nouns,  while  "  twist  "  is  am- 
biguous, but  probably  a  noun.  Obviously  some  of  these 
words  belong  together  in  pairs,  as  "  rapid-fire,"  "  rapid- 
twist,"  "  breech-loading,"  "  field-gun  "  ;  so  that  the  ideas  to 
be  expressed  are  less  than  the  number  of  words.  But  on 
the  other  hand  any  adjective  may  be  preceded  by  an  adverb, 
or  even  by  more  than  one. 

A  very  well  informed  man  told  the  story. 

In  languages  where  the  adjectives  admit  of  full  inflection 
they  are  required  tg  agree  with  the  nouns  to  which  they  be- 


Syntax,  5 1 5 

long  in  number,  gender,  and  case ;  but  in  English  there  are 
only  two  words  that  admit  of  such  distinction — namely,  this 
and  that^  which  have  the  plurals  these  and  those.  Adjectives 
may  be  further  limited  or  defined  by  being  connected  with 
nouns  or  equivalent  expressions  by  means  of  prepositions — 
suitable  for  buildings  unfit  for  severe  service,  unable  to  walk. 
While  any  number  of  single  adjectives  may  be  placed  before 
the  noun  which  they  qualify,  these  adjective  phrases  are  put 
after  it.  We  do  not  say :  "  An  unable  to  walk  man,"  but 
"  A  man  unable  to  walk."  Similar  qualifying  expressions 
may  be  introduced  in  any  part  of  a  sentence  after  either  a 
noun,  an  adjective,  or  a  verb — a  man  with  a  basket  and  a 
fishing-rod.  The  Indian  rode  without  saddle  or  bridle.  In 
either  case  the  qualifying  phrase  is  put  after  the  word 
qualified. 

Thus  far  I  have  spoken  only  of  adjective  expressions 
closely  and  immediately  connected  with  the  subject  or  ob- 
ject ;  but  there  are  others  thrown  in  parenthetically  in  the 
manner  of  passing  remarks,  and  usually  pointed  off  by 
commas. 

"  Yet  man,  ignorant  of  the  constitution  of  the  dust  upon  which  he 
treads,  has  ventured  to  speculate  on  the  nature  of  God." 

"  His  spirit,  mean  in  adversity,  violent  and  inhuman  in  prosperity, 
sank  under  the  load  of  public  abhorrence." 

Words  and  phrases  thus  loosely  connected  with  subject  or 
object,  are  said  to  be  in  apposition,  with  it,  which  means 
placed  near,  not  joined  to  it.  Either  nouns,  adjectives,  or 
adjective  phrases  may  stand  in  apposition  with  the  subject 
or  the  object,  and  may  either  precede  or  follow,  or  be  placed 
at  some  distance  while  other  words  intervene. 

"  Now  therefore  I,  Benjamin  Harrison,  President  of  the  United 
States  of  America,  do  issue  this  my  proclamation." 

The  subject  of  the  sentence  is  "  I." 

"  Stretching  far  away  at  their  feet,  were  seen  noble  forests  of 
oak,  sycamore,  and  cedar." 


5i6  English  Grammar. 

"  Who  is  this  that  cotneth  out  of  the  wilderness  like  pillars  of 
smoke,  perfumed  with  myrrh  and  frankincense^  with  all  powders  of 
the  merchant  ?  " 

"  A  garden  enclosed  is  my  sister,  my  spouse ;  a  spring  shut  up, 
a  fountain  sealed." 

In  this  last  passage  from  Canticles  the  natural  order  of  sub- 
ject, copula,  and  predicate  would  be  : 

"  My  sister,  my  spouse,  is  a  garden  enclosed,  a  spring  shut  up,  a 
fountain  sealed." 

The  very  next  sentence  unfolds  an  exuberance  of  explan- 
atory terms  in  apposition  : 

"  Thy  plants  are  an  orchard  of  pomegranates,  with  pleasant 
fruits  ;  camphire  with  spikenard,  spikenard  and  saffron  ;  calamus 
and  cinnamon,  with  all  trees  of  frankincense  ;  myrrh  and  aloes, 
with  all  the  chief  spices." 

One  example  more  will  show  how  far  appositive   phrases 
may  be  extended. 

"  Herculean  strength  and  a  stentorian  voice. 
Of  wit  a  fund,  of  words  a  countless  choice  ; 
In  learning  rather  various  than  profound, 
In  truth  intrepid,  in  religion  sound  ; 
A  trembling  form  and  a  distorted  sight. 
Yet  firm  in  judgment,  and  of  genius  bright : 
Deep  tinged  with  melancholy's  blackest  shade. 
And,  though  prepared  to  die,  of  death  afraid  ; 
To  more  than  merited  his  kindness  kind. 
And,  though  of  manners  rough,  yet  friendly  mind  ; 
Such  Johnson  was,  of  whom  with  justice  vain, 
O  when  shall  England  see  his  like  again  ? " 

When  the  subject  is  a  pronoun  it  does  not  take  adjectives 
directly,  or  attributatively,  but  may  have  adjectives  or  ad- 
jective phrases  in  apposition. 

Thus  far  none  of  the  explanatory  words  or  phrases  con- 
sidered have  contained  verbs  ;  but  there  may  be  illustrative 
clauses  containing  both  subject  and  verb,  thus  having  with- 


Syntax.  517 

in  themselves  the  essentials  of  sentences.  There  may  thus 
be  subordinate  sentences  contained  in  or  attached  to  prin- 
cipal sentences.  They  may  be  attached  to  subject,  verb,  or 
object,  but  always  by  means  of  conjunctions,  or  pronominal 
or  adverbial  relatives — words  closely  related  in  character. 

"  The  events  which  I  propose  to  relate  form  only  a  single  act  of 
a  great  and  eventful  drama." 

"  While  the  German  princes  who  reigned  at  Paris,  Toledo,  Aries, 
and  Ravenna,  listened  with  reverence  to  the  instructions  of  bishops, 
adored  the  relics  of  martyrs,  and  took  part  eagerly  in  disputes  touch- 
ing the  Nicene  theology,  the  rulers  of  Wessex  and  Mercia  were  still 
performing  savage  rites  in  the  temples  of  Thor  and  Woden." 

"  The  Church  has  many  times  been  compared  to  the  ark  of 
which  we  read  in  the  Book  of  Genesis" 

There  are  even  such  subordinate  sentences  enclosing  others 
still  more  subordinate. 

"  We  read  in  our  Saxon  chronicles  of  tyrants,  who  (when  at 
the  height  of  greatness,)  were  smitten  with  remorse  *  *  *  and 
who  sought  to  atone  for  their  offences  by  cruel  penances  and  incessant 
prayers." 

The  dependent  sentence  may  thus  be  much  longer  than  the 
principal  one. 

While  the  grammatical  subject  is  usually  a  single  word — 
noun  or  pronoun — the  logical  subject,  that  which  we  are 
called  upon  to  think  of,  is  the  aggregate  represented  by  that 
noun  or  pronoun  together  with  all  the  adjectives,  adjective 
phrases,  and  dependent  sentences  attached  thereto.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  object.  The  verb  may  in  like  man- 
ner be  expanded  so  as  to  include  logically  all  the  circum- 
stances of  time,  manner,  cause,  and  purpose.  Thus  the 
whole  sentence,  however  long,  crystallizes  around  the  three 
points  of  Subject,  Verb,  and  Predicate,  or  Object. 

While  the  central  point  of  the  subject  or  object  is 
generally  a  noun  or  pronoun ;  yet  it  sometimes  takes  the 
form  of  a  phrase,  clause,  or  dependent  sentence. 


5i8  English  Grammar. 

"  That  I  have  tane  away  this  old  man's  Daughter, 
It  is  most  true." 

The  first  line  is  here  the  real  subject. 

He  found  that  during  his  absence  a  pack  of  ragamuffins  had 
entered  and  robbed  his  garden,  and  broken  down  his  fruit-trees, 
vines,  and  flowers. 

In  this  example  **  He  "  is  the  subject,  "  found  "  the  verb,  and 
all  the  rest  object. 

As  in  the  above  quotation  from  "  Othello,"  the  little  pro- 
noun "  it "  is  often  made  to  figure  as  the  grammatical  sub- 
ject ;  "  //  is  most  true."  But  "  /'/  "  in  this  case  can  stand  for 
nothing  but  the  previous  line,  which  has  no  need  of  such  a 
representative.  This  it  belongs  to  the  habit  of  the  language, 
but  really  performs  no  more  duty  than  Ae  in  such  a  sentence 
as: 

The  watchman  Ae  fell  asleep. 

Nearly  all  that  has  been  said  of  the  subject  of  a  sentence 
applies  equally  to  the  predicate  after  a  verb  of  being,  or 
the  object  after  a  transitive  verb :  yet  there  are  some  points 
of  difference. 

Where  case  can  be  distinguished  verbs  of  being,  becoming, 
seeming,  etc.,  take  the  same  case  before  and  after  them ; 
transitive  verbs  require  the  objective.  Instances  of  devia- 
tion will  be  noticed  when  we  come  to  treat  of  the  syntax  of 
pronouns.  The  noun  or  pronoun  which  is  the  nucleus  of 
the  object  is  placed  as  near  as  possible  to  the  beginning,  so 
as  to  be  in  close  projcimity  to  the  verb  on  which  it  depends. 
We  may  say : 

Descended  from  an  old  baronial  family  who  had  lived  on  the 
ancestral  estate  three  hundred  years,  Sir  Thomas  was  elected,  etc. 

But  we  may  not  say: 

They  elected,  descended  from  an  old  baronial  family  who  had 
lived  on  the  ancestral  estate  three  hundred  years,  Sir  Thomas. 

This  latter  construction  is  common  in  German,  only  that  an 
article,  an  or  tke,  would  be  placed  before  "  descended." 


Syntax.  519 

The  superfluous  "  it  "  has  no  place  in  the  object.  The 
equally  superfluous  "  there  "  is  also  excluded. 

There  is  great  scarcity  of  water  in  Wyoming. 
They  found  great  scarcity  of  water  in  Wyoming. 

A  reason  for  the  use  of  these  redundant  particles  can  be 
conjectured.  The  verb  to  be  has  nearly  the  effect  of  the 
sign  of  quality  =,  and  like  it  requires  a  term  on  each  side. 
Let  us  substitute  the  sign.  I  =  very  cold.  There  =  about 
500  men.  These  are  complete  equations,  so  far  as  mere 
form  goes,  but,  =  very  cold  ;  =  about  500  men,  show  their 
incompleteness  too  plainly. 

Besides  the  direct  object  of  a  verb  there  may  often  be  an 
indirect  one,  viz.,  the  person  to,  for,  or  on  behalf  of  whom 
an  action  is  performed. 

A B is  building  me  a  house. 


He  is  not  building  me;  he  is  building  a  house;  but  the 
house  is  for  me.  The  to  or  for  often  placed  before  the 
indirect  object  belongs  to  the  class  of  "  modern  improve- 
ments," not  really  necessary,  but  occasioned  by  the  dis- 
appearance of  case-endings.  When  we  were  able  to  distin- 
guish cases  such  indirect  object  was  in  the  dative.  The 
distinction  is  still  sufficiently  shown  by  position,  as  the  in- 
direct object  without  a  preposition  is  placed  before  the 
direct. 

Sing  me  a  song  ;  not,  Sing  a  song  me. 

But  if  a  preposition  is  used  the  order  is  reversed. 

Send  it  to  him  ;  not,  Send  to  him  it. 

A  few  verbs  have  the  appearance  of  having  two  direct 
objects.  We  may  take  teach  as  an  example.  One  may 
teach  boys,  or  he  may  teach  Latin.  So  then  when  he 
teaches  boys  Latin,  which  is  the  direct  and  which  the 
indirect  object?  That  may  be  determined  by  position. 
We  teach  boys  Latin,  but  never  Latin  boys.  In  reality  the 
word  is  used  in  two  different  senses.    In  the  sentence :  "  We 


520  English  Grammar. 

teach  boys,"  teach  =  instruct ;  it  has  not  that  value  in  the 
sentence:  "  We  teach  Latin."  The  words  pay  z-nA  forgive 
may  be  disposed  of  in  the  same  manner.  Ask  is  somewhat 
different,  as  we  do  not  ask  to  or  for,  but  of  or  from  a  person 
2SiA  for  a  thing.  The  indirect  object  here  never  was  a 
dative ;  and  the  Saxon  verb  governed  two  accusatives. 

"  ne  ndn  ne  dorste  of  tham  dsege,  hyne  nan  thing  mare  acsian." 
(nor  no  one  durst  not  from  that  day  ask  him  no  thing  more.) 

Matt,  xxii.,  46. 

In  usage  ask  is  now  assimilated  to  the  others  just  con- 
sidered. We  may  easily  determine  which  is  the  direct 
object  by  trying  the  collocation :  "  I  asked  a  question  him." 
The  indirect  object  need  not  necessarily  be  a  person. 

Verbs  are  modified  by  adverbs,  hence  all  expressions  and 
clauses  that  limit,  define,  or  describe  the  actions  represented 
by  verbs  have  an  adverbial  character,  especially  those  that 
express  cause,  purpose,  time,  manner,  or  instrumentality. 
The  placing  of  adverbial  expressions  is  a  subject  of  great 
extent  and  of  considerable  importance  and  diflSculty.  Only 
an  outline  can  be  given  here. 

Beginning  with  the  simplest  class,  intransitive  verbs  quali- 
fied by  simple  adverbs,  we  find  that,  while  adjectives  regu- 
larly precede  nouns,  adverbs  generally  follow  verbs. 


run  away 

fall  off 

turn  round 

sit  down 

climb  up 

cry  out 

run  aground 

draw  out 

keep  aloof 

go  ahead 

fall  behind 

sit  up 

In  these  and  similar  expressions  the  adverb  is  to  be  placed 
after  the  verb  and  nowhere  else.  They  have  become  almost 
an  integral  part  of  the  verb.  There  are  no  unquestionable 
adverbs,  except  those  derived  from  the  interrogative  pro- 
noun, that  are  imperatively  required  to  be  placed  before 
verbs.  A  very  few  adverbs  of  time,  or  that  express  diflficulty, 
generally  come  before  the  verb  when  it  consists  of  a  single 
word : 

Almost^  erst,  ever,  never,  hardly,  rarely,  scarcely,  seldom. 


Syntax.  521 

But  when  the  verbal  expression  is  composite,  they  may,  and 
generally  do,  follow  the  auxiliary ;  and  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that,  grammatically,  the  auxiliary  is  the  verb. 

When  the  verb  is  present  or  preterit  active — that  is,  con- 
sists of  a  single  word,  there  are  a  number  of  adverbs  that 
never  precede  it.     The  following  are  a  few  examples  : 

Apart,  asleep,  astray,  aloud,  lengthwise,  late,  near,  nigh,  pitapat 
straight,  together,  upside  down. 

The  negative  7iot  has  the  peculiarity  of  always  following  an 
auxiliary  or  the  verb  to  be,  or  to  have. 

Such  adverbs  of  time  as  long  ago,  now,  then,  often,  sometimes 
yesterday,  to-morrow,  by  and  by,  are  homeless  wanderers, 
having  no  fixed  place  in  the  sentence. 

By  far  the  greatest  number  of  adverbs  in  the  language  are 
formed  from  adjectives  by  adding/;/,  and  express  the  manner 
of  doing  something.  Their  proper  place,  which,  it  must  be 
admitted,  is  not  very  well  assured,  is  after  the  verb,  or  at 
least  after  an  auxiliary.  To  place  them  before  the  verb 
would  often  be  perfectly  barbarous. 

He  well  acts  He  unintelligibly  speaks 

They  insolently  behaved         He  too  long  stayed 
They  wastefully  live  He  fashionably  dresses. 

I  conclude  then  that  the  normal  place  of  the  adverb  is 
after  the  verb.  Of  course  there  are  exceptions,  and  we  are 
not  to  expect  consistency  ;  but  such  is  according  to  the 
genius  and  fundamental  analogies  of  the  language. 

There  are  two  places  in  a  sentence  where  adverbs  are  not 
appropriate.  One  is  between  a  transitive  verb  and  its  ob- 
ject. If  the  object  be  a  noun,  adverbs  expressing  the  direc- 
tion of  motion,  and  forming  almost  a  part  of  the  verb,  may 
be  placed  either  before  or  after  such  noun. 

He  cut  down  the  tree  ;  or,   He  cut  the  tree  down. 
He  called  back  the  boy  ;  or,  He  called  the  boy  back. 

When,  however,  a  preposition  precedes  the  noun  object,  an 
adverb  or  adverbial  phrase  may  come  between  that  and  the 


522  English  Grammar. 

verb.  But  when  the  object  is  a  pronoun,  no  adverb  is  al- 
lowed between  it  and  the  verb  : 

They  sent  him  away  ;  not  They  sent  away  him. 

The  other  unsuitable  place  is  between  an  infinitive  and 
to  preceding.  In  modern  English  to  has  become  so  closely- 
associated  with  the  verb  as  to  be  considered  a  part  of  it.  If 
you  ask  any  one  whether  there  is  any  verb  corresponding  to 
the  noun  collision,  he  will  probably  tell  you  that  there  is, 
and  that  it  is  to  collide.  That  is  the  usual  way  of  mention- 
ing any  verb.  So  closely  have  they  become  united  that  I 
can  think  of  no  justification  for  putting  them  asunder.  I 
have  met  with  but  few  instances  of  the  separation  in  books ; 
but  within  a  few  years  newspapers,  magazines,  speeches — all 
documents  of  the  day  and  hour — abound  with  expressions 
somewhat  like  the  following  : 

They  were  expected  to  immediately  return. 
He  promised  to  to-morrow  call  and  settle. 
The  trade  was  expected  to  immensely  increase. 

A  passage  with  this  grammatical  feature  occurs  in  one  of 
Miss  Burney's  novels  written  about  the  time  of  the  Ameri- 
can revolution,  and  "  Childe  Harold  "  has  at  least  one  ;  but 
then  the  arrangement  of  words  in  poetry  is  privileged. 

"  To  sit  on  rocks,  to  muse  o'er  flood  and  fell. 
To  slowly  trace  the  forest's  shady  scene." 

So  they  are  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Herbert  Spen- 
cer, and  probably  in  some  other  works  with  which  I  am  not 
familiar ;  but  happily  they  are  still  rare  in  books  of  any 
literary  merit.     The  following  are  genuine  and  recent : 

"  For  the  champion  of  a  great  cause  [Parnell]  to  repeatedly  and 
with  deliberation  place  himself  in  a  position  rendering  certain  his 
removal,"  etc. 

"  The  great  reduction  in  recent  years  in  the  price  of  copper 
*  *  *  led  to  such  a  general  extension  of  the  uses  of  that  metal, 
as  \.o  finally  not  only  absorb  any  surplus  stock,  but  also,"  etc. 


Syntax,  523 

"  a  proper  care  for  human  life  should  inspire  every  member  of 
Congress  with  a  determination  to,  as  soon  as  possible,  remedy  the 
condition  of  affairs  now  existing." 

It  is  very  curious  to  observe  how  rapidly  such  a  fashion 
will  overspread  the  world  in  the  manner  of  a  rinderpest  or 
a  potato-blight.  A  votary  of  the  fashion,  with  more  ambi- 
tion than  judgment,  gets  the  following  imitation  put  into 
print : 

"  There  has  been  some  mortality  among  the  cattle  *  *  *  due 
Xo principally  overcrowded  ranges." 

'  Leaving  adverbial  expressions  consisting  of  single  words 
and  turning  to  clauses  of  some  length,  there  is  one  that  de- 
serves particular  attention.  It  is  sometimes  called  the  Case 
Absolute,  but  might  more  properly  be  called  the  Absolute 
Clause.  It  introduces  something  that  has  no  expressed  con- 
nection with  the  rest  of  the  sentence  ;  but  a  relation  of  time, 
cause,  or  occasion  is  left  to  be  understood. 

Mrs.  Fauntleroy  having  paid  the  fine  and  costs,  Simpkins  was 
released. 

The  relation  is  one  of  cause. 

The  gate  being  open,  the  cattle  entered  and  destroyed  the  com. 

Here  the  relation  is  one  of  occasion  or  opportunity. 

The  essential  parts  of  the  clause  are  a  subject  different 
from  that  of  the  principal  sentence,  accompanied  by  a  parti- 
ciple instead  of  a  verb.  Where  there  are  sufficient  distinc- 
tions of  case  the  subject  and  participle  are  in  some  one  of 
the  so-called  oblique  cases.  In  Sanskrit  it  was  the  locative, 
employed  with  the  sense  of  at,  during,  or  upon.  In  Greek, 
the  case  absolute  was  the  genitive ;  in  Latin,  where  it  was 
extremely  common,  it  was  the  ablative  ;  in  Anglo-Saxon,  the 
dative  ;  in  English  it  is  the  nominative  or  common  case, 
there  being  no  other  choice  except  the  possessive. 

It  would  be  practically  impossible,  and  useless  even  if 
practicable,  to  name,  describe,  explain,  and  justify  every 
form  of  expression  employed  to  set  forth  all  the  circum^ 


524  English  Grammar, 

stances  of  time,  place,  cause,  manner,  instrumentality,  and 
effect.  We  have  seen  that  when  a  sentence  consists  of  only 
two  or  three  words,  they  must  be  placed  in  a  certain  order, 
and  that  when  single  words  are  added  to  these  there  are 
appropriate  places  for  them.  But  when  the  additional  matter 
amounts  to  long  clauses  and  even  sentences,  the  arrangement 
of  such  material  is  left  very  much  to  the  judgment  and  taste 
of  the  writer.  We  have  merely  found  that  there  are  two 
places,  at  least  according  to  my  judgment,  from  which  they 
are  generally  to  be  excluded.  The  essential  words  of  the 
sentence  preserve  their  relative  places.  By  marking  them 
in  italics  we  can  show  where  the  secondary  matter  is  distrib- 
uted or  accumulated.  It  may  precede  or  follow  them,  be 
interposed  between  them,  or  spread  around  them. 

"  Now  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Tiberias  Caesar, 
Pontius  Pilate  being  governor  of  Judea,  and  Herod  being  tetrarch 
of  Galilee,  and  his  brother  Philip  tetrarch  of  Iturea  and  of  the 
region  of  Trachonitis,  and  Lysanias  the  tetrarch  of  Abilene, 
Annas  and  Caiaphas  being  the  high  priests,  the  word  of  God  came 
to  y^ohn  the  son  of  Zacharias  in  the  wilderness." 

"  The  Bishops  edified  all  who  approached  them  by  the  firmness 
and  cheerfulness  with  which  they  endured  confinement,  by  the 
modesty  and  meekness  with  which  they  received  the  applause  and 
blessings  of  the  whole  nation,  and  by  the  loyal  attachment  which 
they  professed  for  the  persecutor  who  sought  their  destruction." 

"  Even  Powell,  whose  character  for  honesty  stood  high,  had 
bornea-partva.  some  proceedings  which  it  is  impossible  to  defend." 

A  good  deal  is  often  placed  between  the  auxiliary  and 
participle  in  a  compound  tense. 

"  He  had,  in  the  great  case  of  Sir  Edward  Hales,  with  some 
hesitation,  it  is  true,  and  after  some  delay,  coiuurred  with  the 
majority  of  the  bench." 

I  do  not  think,  however,  that  this  is  the  best  arrangement 
possible. 

If  there  be  one  leading  principle  above  all  others  to  be 
seen  in  the  structure  of  English  sentences,  it  is  that  of  keep- 
ing the  essential  words,  or  at  the  very  least  two  of  them. 


Syntax.  525 

near  together,  so  that  their  relations  to  each  other  may  be 
seen  in  an  instant,  without  waiting  for  the  end  of  a  long 
discourse.  It  is  true  that  the  outlying  circumstances  are  in 
danger  of  not  receiving  full  attention,  but  then  they  are  less 
important,  sometimes  not  important  at  all.  Alike  in  accenting 
our  words  and  framing  our  sentences,  our  instinct  is  to  make 
sure  of  the  main  point,  even  at  the  sacrifice  of  some  of  the 
accessories.  But  this  practical  bent  of  the  language  has 
been  interfered  with  by  the  Latin  training  of  the  schools. 
The  Latin  sentence,  like  the  Latin  pronunciation,  rested  on 
principles  different  from  ours  The  simplest  of  Latin  sen- 
tences were  constructed  somewhat  like  the  following  from 
Livy : 

^^  Carthaginienses  eo  anno  argentum  in  stipendium  impositum 
primum  advexerunt." 

"  Consul,  per  Charopum  Epiroten  certior  factus,  quos  saltus 
cum  exercitu  insedisset  rex,  et  ipse,  quum  Corcyrae  hibernasset, 
vera  prime  in  continentem  transvectus,  ad  hostem  ducere/(fr^//." 

Latin  preserved  the  integrity  of  its  sentences,  by  placing 
the  principal  words  at  the  extremities,  reminding  us  of 
structures  that  have  both  sides  faced  with  solid  masonry, 
and  the  space  between  filled  up  with  earth  and  rubble.  Sen- 
tences constructed  on  this  principle  would  be  laborious  to 
follow,  but  in  classic  Latin  they  were  generally  short.  The 
sentences  of  Sallust,  the  most  rhetorical  of  all  the  Roman 
writers,  average  only  twenty-eight  words.  We  are  not  to 
understand  that  all  Latin  sentences  are  precisely  like  those 
above,  or  that  all  English  sentences  ought  to  follow  a 
definite  model,  thus  producing  a  sameness  that  would  be 
tiresome.  The  variety  is  alike  endless  in  both  languages ; 
but  the  leading  characteristics  can  be  detected  under  nearly 
all  disguises. 

The  maxim  that  no  sentence  should  end  in  small  or 
unimportant  words  is  doubtless  an  outgrowth  of  Latin 
teaching,  and  its  general  application  to  English  is  impos- 
sible. It  has  contributed,  however,  to  the  bad  habit  of 
crowding  one  phrase  or  clause  inside  of  another,  to  which  is 


526  English  Grammar, 

due  in  turn  most  of  the  ambiguity  and  bad  composition  we 
meet  with. 

Arrangement  is  more  important  than  concord  or  govern- 
ment. We  rarely  misunderstand  any  one  because  of  violation 
of  common  rules  of  grammar.  If  the  proper  words  be 
chosen  and  properly  placed,  a  wrong  number,  gender,  or 
case  will  seldom  be  a  fatal  defect.     If  an  Indian  says : 

"  Me  see  white  man  shoot  injun  yesday," 

his  meaning  is  as  unmistakable  as  if  clothed  in  the  choicest 
language  of  the  schools.  But  the  adverb  of  time  is  the  only 
word  that  can  be  moved  from  its  place  without  impairing 
or  destroying  the  sense.  I  do  not  claim  that  strange  or 
uncouth  forms  should  be  encouraged,  but  only  that  some 
offences  against  correct  speech  are  more  heinous  than  others. 
We  meet  every  day  with  sentences  that  are  either  ambiguous, 
nonsensical,  or  ungraceful  solely  because  their  words  are 
misplaced.  There  was  once  said  to  be  in  the  old  Columbian 
Museum  in  Boston  a  bottle  partly  filled  with  wine  and  bear- 
ing this  inscription : 

"  This  is  the  wine  that  Green  drank  and  the  bottle  that  was 
executed  for  highway  robbery." 

Such  an  inscription  is  not  beyond  the  bounds  of  possibility, 
or  even  of  probability.  There  is  little  more  than  a  displace- 
ment of  the  words,  "  and  the  bottle."  So  I  have  read  of 
a  Dutch  village  of  500  houses  on  the  Hudson  or  the 
Mohawk  containing  2,000  inhabitants,  all  with  their  gable 
ends  turned  towards  the  street.  It  is  frankly  admitted  that 
these  two  examples,  although  found  in  print,  may  have 
gained  something  by  re-editing ;  the  following  are  taken  at 
first  hand,  but  their  respective  and  respectable  authors  may 
not  be  ambitious  to  have  their  names  made  public : 

"  The  five  young  ministers  of  the  Reformed  Presbyterian 
church,  who  had  been  on  trial  before  Pittsburg  presbytery 
*  *  *  were  yesterday  suspended  and  prohibited  from 
exercising  their  ministerial  office  until  they  repent  by  a  vote  of 
twenty-five  to  forty." 


Syntax,  527 

Repenting  by  a  vote  of  twenty-five  to  forty  is  an  odd 
kind  of  penitence  ;  possibly  it  would  be  more  sincere  if  they 
should  repent  by  a  vote  of  forty  to  twenty-five. 

**  Mr.  Struble  said  that  *  *  *  he  rose  to  speak  on  the 
question  of  public  buildings  as  represented  by  the  unfinished 
calendar  of  the  House,  upon  which  were  thirty-five  bills  passed 
by  the  committee  of  the  whole  on  May  29,  no  one  of  which  had 
been  permitted  to  be  considered  by  the  Speaker  of  the  House." 

It  may  be  a  pity  if  the  Speaker  be  not  permitted  to  con- 
sider bills  ;  but  how  would  it  be  if  the  bills  had  not  "  been 
permitted  by  the  Speaker  of  the  House  to  be  considered." 
The  latter  is  what  was  intended. 

**  Two  police  saw  Collins  take  money  from  the  bar.  Upon 
searching  him  they  found  coins  marked  for  the  purpose  of  de- 
tecting the  thief  in  his  pocket." 

A  dangerous  man  was  Collins  if  he  carried  a  thief  in  his 
pocket. 

"  Dr.  Ramon  de  la  Sota,  a  Spanish  physician  who  has  given 
much  attention  to  the  subject,  states  that  he  is  frequently  called 
upon  to  treat  Spanish  ladies,  who  do  not  themselves  smoke  for 
irritation  of  the  throat." 

The  report  fails  to  state  what  these  ladies  do  smoke  for. 

"  It  is  the  business  of  the  physiologists  to  trace  our  sensations 
to  their  material  organs,  not  ours." 

The  italics  are  not  in  the  original.  But  if  I  were  to  go  on  I 
might  be  tempted  to  expose  grammatical  "  wickedness  in 
high  places,"  and  so  may  as  well  stop  here. 

Adverbial  clauses  expressive  of  time  and  place  have  no 
special  position,  but  may  be  put  wherever  they  will  least 
obstruct  the  other  parts  of  the  sentence.  It  is  very  common 
to  place  them  either  at  the  beginning  or  the  end.  Adjective 
clauses  describing  the  subject  or  the  object  should  be  placed 
near  those  terms ;  and  clauses  defining  the  action  of  the 
verb  are  very  often  placed  after  the  object,  especially  if  it 
has  no  following  of  its  own. 


528  English  Grammar. 

He  wrote  ten  letters  within  the  space  of  a  single  week,  and 
with  his  right  arm  in  a  sling. 

It  would  not  be : 

He  wrote  within  a  single  week,  and  with  his  right  arm  in  a 
sling,  ten  letters. 

The  adverbial  clauses  might  be  placed  at  the  beginning,  or 
one  at  each  extremity.  But  this  is  only  a  hint  of  a  general 
principle,  and  not  a  rule  that  will  hold  good  in  all  cases. 
Indeed  there  are  few  such. 

Relative  clauses  should  follow  as  closely  as  possible  the 
words  which  are  the  antecedents ;  otherwise  it  may  be  un- 
certain what  they  relate  to. 

On  the  steamer  yesterday  I  met  with  Judge  Crocker,  the 
father  of  our  friend  George  Crocker,  who  married  Mabel  Evans, 
the  owner  of  the  cutlery  works  on  Silver  Creek,  who  was  going 
to  Boston  to  visit  a  sick  sister. 

This  sentence  leaves  it  uncertain  who  was  going  to  Boston, 
or  which  of  the  three  persons  named  owned  the  cutlery 
works.  The  construction  favors  Mrs.  Crocker,  who  was 
probably  neither  the  proprietor  nor  the  visitor  in  the  case. 
The  principle  of  placing  the  relative  next  to  its  antecedent, 
sometimes  comes  in  the  way  of  the  placing  of  an  adverbial 
clause  after  the  object. 

They  hired  Warren,  who  had  worked  in  the  factory  fifteen 
years,  for  $70  a  month. 

The  meaning  is  that  they  hired  Warren  for  $70  a  month,  he 
having  worked  in  the  factory  fifteen  years.  In  writing, 
punctuation  sheds  a  feeble  and  wavering  light  on  the 
meaning,  but  for  the  spoken  language  even  that  guidance 
is  wanting. 

The  difficulty  of  making  a  lucid,  unambiguous  arrange- 
ment is  a  real  one,  and  may  be  illustrated  in  this  manner. 
Let  A^  one  of  the  essential  elements  of  a  sentence,  require 
to  be  modified  by  the  three  clauses,  b,  c,  d.     If  they  could 

be  arranged  thus  -  <Cl[^^  all  would  be  easy.    But  as  we  can- 


Syntax.  529 

not  say  three  things  at  once,  we  are  compelled  to  take  them 
one  at  a  time,  A.k,L4 ;  and  the  danger  is  that  <^ may  appear 
to  apply,  not  to  A,  but  to  b  or  c. 

The  misplacing  of  only  is  a  frequent  source  of  ambiguity. 
In  careful  writing  the  word  limited  is  preceded  by  only  or 
followed  by  alone.  While  this  is  the  general  distinction  it 
is  not  always  adhered  to. 

"  She  was  accounted  inferior  to  the  Queen  only  in  dignity." 

Prescott. 

That  is,  she  was  inferior  in  no  other  respect.  Either  only 
ought  to  follow  "  inferior  "  or  be  replaced  by  alone.  Profes- 
sor Earle  quotes  from  Clarendon's  History  : 

"  He  was  a  man  of  few  words  except  in  hunting  and  hawking, 
in  which  he  only  knew  how  to  behave  himself." 

and  suggests  that  "  modern  usage  would  require  the  he  and 
the  only  to  change  places.  I  do  not  see  how  that  would 
mend  the  matter ;  for  if  "  only  he  knew  how  to  behave  him- 
self," it  follows  that  no  one  else  did ;  whereas  the  meaning 
of  the  noble  author  no  doubt  was  that  "  it  was  only  in  hunt- 
ing and  hawking  that  he  knew  how  to  behave  himself." 

There  is  no  patent  method  of  escaping  this  difHculty  ;  but 
time,  care,  judgment  and  good  taste  will  surmount  it ;  and 
in  the  next  chapter  I  purpose  to  offer  a  few  practical  sug- 
gestions on  this  and  other  points. 

Thus  far  we  have  considered  only  affirmative  sentences, 
those  that  assert  that  something  is  or  was  or  will  be.  A  few 
words  may  now  be  said  about  those  that  contain  a  negation. 
A  negative  character  may  be  given  to  any  kind  of  sentence. 
The  common  negative  in  the  present  stage  of  the  language 
is  not,  a  shortened  form  of  nought  or  naught.  The  negation 
resides  in  the  letter  n,  and  is  present  equally  in  no,  nor,  never 
neither,  and  the  compounds  of  no.  No,  as  an  adjective  pro- 
noun, is  the  negative  of  o-=one  ;  and  bears  the  same  relation 
to  none  that  my  does  to  mine.  In  virtue  of  its  adjective 
quality  its  place  is  before  a  noun.  Not,  being  an  adverb, 
naturally  follows  a  verb. 


34 


530  English  Grammar. 

"  Go  not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and  into  any  city  of  the 
Samaritans,  enter  ye  not."  Matt,  x.,  5. 

The  departure  from  this  form  of  expression  has  not  im- 
proved the  language.  At  present  not  follows  only  the  aux- 
iliaries and  the  verbs  be  and  have.  Where  there  is  no  natu- 
ral necessity  for  any  auxiliary,  do  is  used  pro  forma  to  pre- 
cede not.  One  of  the  evidences  that  let  is  not  yet  fully 
converted  into  an  auxiliary  is  its  relation  to  this  negative. 
We  no  longer  say  :  "  Let  not"  but  feel  required  to  say  :  "  Do 
not  let." 

When  applied  to  any  other  part  of  speech  than  a  verb  not 
infinitive  not  has  priority  of  position. 

Not  having  provided  myself  with  a  pass,  I  was  refused  admit- 
tance. 

He  bought  a  copy  of  Marlowe,  second-hand,  but  not  soiled  or 
worn. 

It  may  be  said  then  that  not  follows  a  finite  verb  to  which 
it  applies,  but  precedes  anything  else.  But  the  association 
of  not  with  other  parts  of  speech  is  often  a  mere  artificial 
arrangement  of  words,  while  it  logically  follows  the  verb. 

iVi?/ justice,  but  mercy,  is  the  prayer  of  mortals, 

may  as  well  be  written  : 

The  prayer  of  mortals  is  not  justice,  but  mercy. 

The  poets  sometimes  indulge  in  strange  dislocations  : 

"  For  not  to  have  been  dipped  in  Lethe's  lake 
Could  save  the  son  of  Thetis  from  to  die." 

Not  belongs  between  "  could  "  and  "  save  "  ;  "  to  have  been 
dipped  "  :=  immersion,  and  "  to  die  "  =  death. 

Among  our  inheritances  from  the  Latin  is  the  doctrine 
that  two  negatives  make  an  afifirmative.  It  is  not  self-evi- 
dent that  reiterated  denial  amounts  to  affirmation  or  that 
refusal  oft  repeated  is  consent.  Such  a  grammatical  canon 
was  unknown  to  the  Greeks,  and  is  not  recognized  by  the 


Syntax.  531 

Spaniards.  It  is  modern  in  English,  and  entirely  due  to 
Latin  and  French  influences.  Our  Saxon  and  early  English 
ancestors  were  profusely  liberal  in  their  use  of  negatives. 

"  They  can  not  seen  in  that  non  auntagd 
Ne  in  non  other  way  saue  mareag^." 

Chaucer  :  "  Man  of  Lawes  Tale." 

"  He  is  fre  of  hors  that  «er  «ade  «on." 

"  Proverbs  of  Hending." 

"  nas  tid  ne  tyme  ni  ne  wurth  that  god  ne  send  gode  maenn  his 
folc  forte  3elathie  to  his  rice." 

(There  has  not  been  tide  nor  time,  nor  will  not  be  that  God 
sendeth  not  good  men  for  to  bid  his  folk  to  his  kingdom.) 

"  Old  English  Homily." 

"  By  innocence  I  sweare  and  by  my  youth, 
I  have  one  heart,  one  bosome,  and  one  truth, 
And  that  no  woman  has,  nor  never  none 
Shall  mistris  be  of  it  saue  I  alone." 

Shakesp.:  "Twelfe  Night,"  iii.,  i. 

This  redundant  negation  began  to  disappear  from  careful 
prose  about  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  the  process 
of  pruning  is  not  yet  quite  complete. 

The  Latin  doctrine  of  the  negative  was  that  it  not  merely 
negatived  a  proposition,  but  reversed  it.  It  was  like  the 
military  movement  of  about-face,  which,  when  repeated,  led 
to  the  point  of  starting.  It  resembled  the  continued  mul- 
tiplication of  a  negative  quantity,  in  which  all  the  odd  terms 
are  negative  and  all  the  even  ones  positive.  Hence  the 
small  boy's  frequent  plea  : 

I  did  n't  do  nuthin  to  nobody^ 

is  negative  as  intended. 

Many  words  contain  a  negation  in  themselves — ««just,  in- 
sincere,  flf/^obedient,  child/<?j^,  naked,  empty.  When  one  of 
these  words  is  used  with  a  separate  negative,  it  amounts  to 
a  double  negation.  Not  unsuccessful  =  successful.  But, 
when  between  an  idea  and  its  opposite  there  is  a  consider- 


532  English  Grammar. 

able  range  of  intermediate  degrees,  the  negation  of  one  term 
is  not  the  affirmation  of  the  opposite.  The'  bottle  is  not 
empty,  is  not  equivalent  to  The  bottle  is  full.  So  to  say  that 
it  is  not  improbable  is  by  no  means  the  same  as  to  say  that 
it  is  probable,  as  the  chances  may  be  equal.  Double  nega- 
tives of  this  kind  are  much  used  as  a  sort  of  guarded,  half- 
way affirmations.  Hence  the  dictum  that  two  negatives 
make  an  affirmative  requires  to  be  taken  with  some  grains  of 
allowance. 

There  is  a  case  of  repetition  of  the  negative  the  propriety 
of  which  has  never  been  decided.  There  are  only  opinions 
for  and  against  it. 

"  He  shall  not  cry,  nor  lift  up,  nor  cause  his  voice  to  be  heard 
in  the  street."  Isaiah  xlii.,  2. 

Some  now  think  that  the  sentence  would  be  improved  by 
having  only  one  negative,  and  substituting  or  for  each  nor. 
Similar  sentences  may  be  found  in  which  the  first  negative 
is  no,  never,  or  neither.  The  above  sentence  from  Isaiah  has 
been  influenced  by  the  phraseology  of  the  Hebrew  original, 
of  which  it  is  a  very  close  and  faithful  translation — the  nega- 
tive being  there  repeated, — and  by  a  doctrine  of  the  English 
verb  different  from  that  which  is  now  beginning  to  appear. 
On  the  question  whether  or  or  nor  be  preferable  in  such 
sentence  the  following  points  may  be  presented. 

1.  In  the  earlier  ages  of  the  language  when  negatives  were 
thrown  around  as  if  they  cost  nothing,  nor  would  unques- 
tionably have  had  the  preference. 

2.  At  present  it  would  be  useless  to  cite  examples  or 
authorities,  as  plenty  could  be  found  on  each  side. 

3.  The  meaning  is  the  same  either  way. 

He  has  not  eaten  nor  slept  since  Friday  at  noon. 
He  has  not  eaten  or  slept  since  Friday  at  noon. 

These  two  lines  state  the  same  fact,  and  in  ways  equally 
unmistakable.  The  only  question  is  whether  or  not  there 
is  a  superfluous  negative  in  the  first. 


Syntax,  533 

4.  In  signification  and  effect,  nor  is  not  equivalent  to  or  -j- 
not^  but  to  and  +  not.  It  does  not  introduce  an  alternative 
but  an  addition,  "  He  has  not  eaten  nor  drunk  "  does  not 
mean  "  He  has  not  eaten,  or  he  has  not  drunk,  but  "  He  has 
not  eaten,  and  he  has  not  drunk. 

5.  Not  is  generally  placed  immediately  after  a  verb  to 
which  it  applies — in  modern  English  oftenest  an  auxiliary. 
Its  influence  is  co-extensive  with  that  of  the  verb  which  it 
affects,  governs,  or  controls,  and  within  that  domain  there  is 
no  need  of  another  negative.  It  is  only  necessary  to  ascer- 
tain the  limits  to  which  the  force  of  the  verb  extends. 

I  cannot  nor  will  consent  to  the  proposal. 

Here  can  does  not  control  will,  and  therefore  a  second 
negative  is  necessary.  Cannot  or  will  would  be  ambiguous 
or  unmeaning. 

I  have  said  that  the  above  example  from  Isaiah  has  been 
influenced  by  the  wording  of  the  Hebrew.  Now  we  may 
take  one  in  which  or  is  employed  instead  of  nor. 

"  Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee  any  graven  image,  or  any 
likeness  of  anything  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  in  the  earth 
beneath,  or  in  the  waters  under  the  earth." 

For  this  difference  two  reasons  can  be  assigned,  first,  that 
the  negative  is  not  repeated  in  the  Hebrew,  and  second,  that 
the  whole,  as  far  as  the  word  anything  is  governed  by  the 
verb  make,  which  is  controlled  by  not.  Yet  we  are  not  to 
expect  such  a  distinction  to  be  consistently  observed.  Let 
us  take  as  another  example  Matthew  x.,  9. 

"  Provide  neither  gold,  nor  silver,  nor  brass  in  your  purses  ;  nor 
scrip  for  your  journey,  neither  two  coats,  neither  shoes,  nor  yet 
staves." 

Here  the  negative  is  repeated,  although,  according  to  the 
principle  I  have  stated,  it  is  not  necessary,  as  "  provide  " 
governs  to  the  last  word.  The  negative  is  repeated  in  the 
Greek  original.     Admirable  then  as  the  English  Bible  is,  it 


534  English  Grammar. 

is  influenced  somewhat  by  foreign  idiom  in  its  use  of  the 
vernacular. 

In  the  following  sentences  nor  or  some  equivalent  word  is 
necessary. 

"  Blame  not  thy  clime,  nor  chide  the  distant  sun." 
"  If  she  sent  to  a  hundred  lawyers,  not  one  nor  all  of  them 
could  alter  the  law." 

"  My  hair  is  gray,  but  not  with  years. 
Nor  grew  it  white  in  a  single  night." 

In  the  following  nor  is  not  required,  for  the  reason  that 
the  verb  to  which  the  first  negative  applies  covers  the  whole 
sentence. 

"  Call  not  thy  friends,  nor  thy  brethren,  neither  thy  kinsmen, 
nor  thy  rich  neighbors." 

"  I  am  not  ugly  nor  old, 
Nor  a  villanous  scold." 

When  not  applies  to  any  other  word  than  a  verb,  it  in  like 
manner  affects  that  particular  word  as  far  as  its  action  or 
influence  extends. 

No,  neither,  never  are  equivalent  to  not  any,  not  either,  not 
ever.  The  separation  or  union  of  the  parts  does  not  affect 
the  force  or  extent  of  the  negation. 

"  Heav'n  whose  high  walls  fear  no  assault  or  siege. 
Or  ambush  from  the  deep."  Milton. 

No  =  not  any  ;  hence  fear  no  =  fear  not  any. 

"With  no  great  love  for  learning  or  the  learn'd." 

Byron  :  "  Don  Juan." 
"  There  was  no  manifestation  of  disgust  or  pity,  or  indignation 
or  sorrow."  Dickens. 

"  I  never  saw  her  either  read  a  book  or  occupy  herself  with 
needlework."  Marryat  :  "  Peter  Simple." 

"  And  never  more  saw  I  or  horse  or  rider." 

Coleridge  :  "  Piccolomini." 
"  I  have  neither  age,  person  or  character,  to  found  dislike  on." 

Sheridan:  "Rivals." 


Syntax.  535 

"  Often  had  William  of  Deloraine 
Rode  through  the  battle's  bloody  plain, 
And  trampled  down  the  warriors  slain, 
And  neither  known  remorse  or  awe." 

Scott. 

Neither  is  oftener  than  any  of  the  others  followed  by  nor^ 
so  that  many  seem  to  think  that  it  has  a  peculiar  and  pre- 
scriptive right  to  a  negative  attendant ;  but  really  it  has,  if 
possible,  less  claim  than  any  of  the  others.  Neither  =  not 
either  =  not  any  one  of  the  two.  It  negatives  two  things 
considered  one  at  a  time.  The  supposed  necessary  bond 
between  neither  and  nor  depends  upon  contrasting  them 
with  the  correlation  either  *  *  *  ^r,  a  false  proportion  : 
Neither  :  nor  : :  either  :  or. 

We  have  not  found  either  peace  or  plenty  in  this  unhappy  Ireland 

is  precisely  the  same  as. 

We  have  found  neither  peace  or  plenty,  etc. 

The  latter  seems  strange  because  it  is  unusual. 

Neither  is  often  made  to  alternate  with  nor  in  the  Bible, 
merely  to  give  variety  of  expression. 

The  employment  of  nor  in  the  place  of  neither — 

"  Nor  in  sheet  nor  in  shroud  we  wound  him," 

is  probably  due  to  a  mistaken  idea  that  they  are  only  two 
forms  of  the  same  word. 

There  is  a  kind  of  double  negative,  not  uncommon,  which 
seems  often  unnecessary,  if  not  silly. 

There  is  no  telling  what  he  might  not  do.  A  more  prac- 
tical question  would  seem  to  be,  "  What  he  might  do." 

All  sentences  thus  far  considered  have  affirmed  or  denied, 
but  others  remain  which  make  no  assertion.  They  are  direct 
questions  and  direct  commands,  or  interrogative  and  im- 
perative sentences,  of  which  only  a  few  words  need  be  said. 

Interrogative  sentences,  considered  grammatically,  are 
naturally  divisible  into  two  classes.  The  first  aim  direct  at 
the  central  point  of  the  fact  under  inquiry — the  verb  by 
which  that  fact  can  be  stated. 


536  English  Grammar. 

Have  you  written  a  letter  to  the  Governor  ? 

The  answer  is  expected  to  be  equally  short  and  direct,  and,' 
if  affirmative,  to  take  very  nearly  one  of  three  forms.  "  I 
have  written  to  him,"  "  I  have,''  or  "  Yes."  If  the  answer  be 
negative,  not  is  placed  after  "  have,"  or  "  No  "  is  substituted 
for  "  Yes." 

The  verb,  being  the  point  in  question,  is  regularly  the  first 
and  interrogative  word,  but  in  the  composite  tenses  it  is  only 
the  auxiliary  that  is  placed  first,  and  the  rest  of  the  verbal 
expression  may  be  at  some  distance. 

Have  you  ever,  in  all  your  intercourse  with  the  world,  found  a 
man  perfectly  contented  with  his  lot  ? 

The  simple  verbs  take  do  as  a  formal  auxiliary,  for  in  the 
present  state  of  the  language  have  and  be  are  the  only  single 
verbs  that  ask  questions. 

The  second  class  of  interrogatories  never  bring  the  main 
fact  in  question,  but  only  some  circumstance.  Referring  to 
the  first  example  above,  the  fact  of  writing  would  be  taken 
for  granted ;  but  it  might  be  asked,  '*  Who  wrote  ?  What 
or  to  whom,  when,  where,  how  or  why  did  you  write?" 
These  interrogative  words,  consisting  of  the  interrogative 
pronoun  and  its  derived  adverbs,  are  placed  first  in  the  sen- 
tence. Questions  of  this  class  do  not  admit  of  the  general 
and  direct  answer  yes  or  no,  but  only  of  a  special  answer 
going  to  the  particular  point  of  the  inquiry. 

Instead  of  asking  a  question  of  any  kind,  one  may  some- 
times effect  the  same  purpose  by  expressing  a  desire  for 
information. 

I  should  like  to  know  if  you  have  written  to  the  Governor. 

But  a  substitute  of  this  kind  is  not  really  an  interrogatory. 
An  imperative  sentence  is  a  direct  command.  As  such  it 
must  be  addressed  to  some  one  present,  or  who  can  be 
reached  by  voice,  letter,  or  other  direct  means.  It  would  be 
no  better  than  a  repetition  to  say  that  the  subject  of  the 
verb  is  the  second  person — that  is,  the  person  addressed. 

"  Repine  not  at  thy  lot." 


Syntax.  537 

The  form  of  the  verb  is  the  shortest  and  simplest  that  can 
be  used.  In  point  of  fact,  it  is  Hke  the  infinitive,  but  only 
for  the  reason  that  that  too  is  reduced  to  its  lowest  terms. 
In  languages  that  admit  of  such  apocopation  the  imperative 
is  shorter  than  the  infinitive.  It  is  without  variation  for 
person,  number,  or  tense. 

The  subject  of  an  imperative  verb  is  seldom  expressed, 
but  when  it  is  it  follows  the  verb : 

"  When  I  rear  my  hand  do  you  the  same." 

Shakespeare  :  "  Tempest,"  ii.,  i. 

When  a  noun  is  placed  before  the  verb  it  is  as  an  exclama- 
tion or  a  call  to  ensure  attention. 

"  Tigress,  begone  !  " 

Addison  :  "  Rosamond." 

Expressions  like:  "The  Lord  forgive  you,"  have  been  con- 
sidered, page  458. 

Something  like  imperatives  of  the  first  and  third  persons 
are  obtained  by  the  help  of  let. 

"  Let  us  stand  by  each  other." 

"  He  trusted  in  the  Lord  that  he  would  deliver  him,  let  him 
deliver  him."  Psa.  xxii.,  8. 

In  point  of  form  it  is  a  command  to  some  ideal  second  person 
to  permit  something  to  be  done,  and  sometimes  is  such 
command : 

Stop  the  car  and  let  me  get  out. 

Very  often  it  is  a  mere  exhortation,  or  wish,  and  unfortu- 
nately the  words  do  not  show  the  distinction.  It  was 
otherwise  when  fashion  sanctioned  "  Go  we  "  for  "  Let  us 
go,"  and  "  Come  they  "  for  "  Let  them  come."  Our  lan- 
guage is  now  very  largely  dependent  upon  auxiliary  words  ; 
but  in  many  cases,  and  notably  in  negative,  interrogative, 
and  imperative  sentences  it  has  been  weakened  by  an  ex- 
cessive use  of  them. 

There  are  two  substitutes  for  an  imperative  mood.     The 
first  of  these  is  by  the  use  of  shall. 

"  Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee  any  graven  image." 


538  English  Grammar. 

Two  things  show  that  shalt  is  not  imperative.  It  is  preceded 
by  its  nominative  thoUy  and  has  the  personal  ending  -/.  It  is 
therefore  indicative,  and  makes  an  assertion.  Shall  expresses 
not  duty  or  obligation,  but  authority.  To  say  that  you 
shall  do  this  or  that  is  not  saying  that  you  ought,  but  that 
you  are  required  by  an  authority  able  and  willing  to  enforce 
its  behests.  Grammatically  sltall  cannot  be  made  into  an 
imperative,  or  an  infinitive  either. 

The  effect  of  an  imperative  may  also  be  attained  in  a  mild 
way  by  expressing  a  desire  that  the  thing  required  be  done. 

MISCELLANEOUS  POINTS  OF  SYNTAX. 

Dr.  Latham  observes  that  the  only  adjective  that  governs 
a  case  is  the  word  like.  Like  is  not  an  ellipsis  for  like  to, 
the  to  being  a  modern  innovation,  a  part  of  the  general  ten- 
dency  to  use  a  multitude  of  auxiliary  words.  Like  governs 
a  dative  case  in  most  languages  that  have  one  ;  and  earlier 
English  was  no  exception. 

"  Sothlice  hwam  telle  ic  thas  cneorysse  gelice  ?  " 
(Truly  whom  call  I  this  generation  like  ?) 

Matt,  xi.,  16. 

"  Ther  nas  no  kni3t  him  ilik."—"  King  Horn." 

But  worth  also  governs  a  case. 

**  There 's  bucks  and  raes  on  Bilhope  braes, 
There  's  herd  in  Shortwood  Shaw  ; 
But  a  lily-white  doe  in  the  garden  goes  ; 
She  's  fairly  worth  them  a'  " 

"  Bride  of  Lammermoor." 

I  have  long  held  that  like,  when  it  expresses  a  direct  rela- 
tion, is  a  preposition  ;  and  I  find  that  now  I  am  supported 
by  the  authority  of  Professor  Earle  and  the  great  Dictionary 
of  the  Philological  Society.  But  if  like  be  sometimes  a 
preposition,  so  also  is  worth. 

What  is  generally  regarded  as  grammar  concerns  chiefly 
pronouns  and  verbs.     As  the  personal  pronouns  have  pre- 


Syntax.  539 

served  the  dist'inctions  of  number,  gender,  and  case,  they 
have  to  agree  with  the  nouns  which  they  represent  in  num- 
ber and  gender,  so  far  as  they  are  capable  of  distinguishing 
the  latter  ;  verbs  of  which  they  are  the  subjects  must  agree 
with  them  in  number ;  and  when  they  are  the  objects  of 
verbs  or  follow  prepositions  they  are  required  to  be  in  the 
objective  case. 

What  is  called  the  ethical  dative,  which  is  neither  sub- 
ject nor  object,  is  now  rare.  When  it  has  any  meaning  it  is 
equivalent  to  the  modern  phrase :  "  for  my  sake,"  "  to  oblige 
me,"  etc.     When,  in  "  Henry  VI.,"  Duke  Humphrey  says, 

"  leape  me  over  this  stoole  and  runne  away." 

his  meaning  might  be  thils  expressed  : 

Oblige  me  by  leaping  over  this  stool  and  running  away. 

The  reflexive  pronoun  being  a  comparatively  modern 
formation,  the  simple  personal  pronoun  is  often  used  in  its 
place  by  old  authors  and  by  poets. 

"  I  made  me  great  works  ;  I  builded  me  houses  ;  I  planted  me 
vineyards  ;  I  made  me  gardens."  Eccl.  ii.,  4. 

"  He  sate  htm  down  at  a  pillar's  base, 
And  pass'd  his  hand  athwart  his  face." 

Byron. 

The  combinations  with  self  are  extremely  confused.  In 
the  first  place  they  are  made  to  serve  two  purposes  that 
have  no  connection  or  resemblance.  They  are  emphatic, 
and  they  are  reflexive.  In  the  two  following  sentences 
Mmself  performs  entirely  different  offices." 

"  But  he  himself  went  a  day's  journey  into  the  wilderness." 
"  He  that  is  swift  of  foot  shall  not  deliver  himself" 

In  the  second  place  part  of  them  are  formed  with  objective 
cases  of  the  personal  pronouns,  part  with  possessives,  and  a 
part  {herself  and  itself^  are  uncertain.  Moreover  it  is  not 
always  clear  whether  they  are  nouns  or  pronouns.  Now  a 
noun  is  of  the  third  person,  unless  directly  addressed,  or  in 
apposition  with  a  pronoun  of  the  first  or  second  person. 


540  English  Grammar. 

There  is  then  a  chance  that  myself  may  be  of  the  third  per- 
son, and  accordingly  Dr.  Latham  says  : 

"  When  myself  or  thyself  stands  alone,  the  verb  is  in  the  third 
person — myself  is  (not  am)  weak,  thyself  is  (not  art)  weak. 

But  that  is  at  variance  with  authoritative  usage. 

"  And  that  thyself  shall  now  sen," ' 

"  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion." 
"  So  shall  thy  judgment  be  ;  thyself  hast  decided  it." 

I  Kings  xx.,  40. 
"  by  examining  of  whom  thyself  mayest  take  knowledge  of  these 
things." — Acts  xxiv.,  8. 

^''Myself  am  Naples." — Shakesp.  :  "Tempest,"  i.,  2. 
"  Which  way  I  fly  is  hell  ;  myself  am  hell." 

Milton  :  "  P.  L.,"  iv.,  75. 

The  pronouns  this^  that,  and  yonder  once  pointed  out  ob- 
jects different  in  place  or  differently  related  to  the  speaker  or 
the  person  spoken  to. 

This  dog  (of  mine),  that  horse  (of  yours),  yonder  tower  (on 
the  hill). 

But  yonder  has  almost  gone  out  of  use,  except  as  an  adverb 
of  place,  and  that  has  to  perform  double  duty.  This  and 
that  are,  or  rather  have  been,  also  used  of  things  not  before 
the  eyes,  but  before  the  mind.  Two  things  having  been 
named  a  moment  before,  we  may  refer  to  them  as  this  and 
that.  All  argument  to  determine  which  shall  be  called  this 
and  which  that  was  cut  short  by  the  rule  of  Latin  grammar, 
which  applied  this  to  the  one  last  named  and  that  to  the 
other 

"  Behold  !  if  fortune,  or  a  mistress,  frowns, 
Some  plunge  in  business,  others  shave  their  crowns. 
To  ease  the  soul  of  one  oppressive  weight. 
This  quits  an  empire,  that  embroils  a  state." — Pope. 

The  words  were  also  used  without  reference  to  things 
specifically  named,  but  with  the  general  sense  of  "  one  or  the 
other  "  : 

'  Quoted  by  Matzner. 


Syntax.  541 

"  As  when  two  scales  are  charged  with  doubtful  loads, 

From  side  to  side  the  trembling  balance  nods  ; 
****** 

Till  poised  aloft,  the  resting  beam  suspends 

Each  equal  weight,  nor  this,  nor  tkaty  descends." 

Pope's  "Iliad." 

When  the  things  contrasted  were  quite  evident,  this  kind 
of  antithesis  was  very  neat  and  effective  ;  but  if  clumsily 
handled  a  hearer  might  be  left  at  a  loss  to  know  which  was 
this  and  which  was  that.  It  is  perhaps  for  some  such  reason 
that  this  use  of  the  demonstratives,  once  so  common,  has 
been  almost  abandoned.  We  now  employ  the  former  and 
the  latter  for  a  similar  purpose ;  but,  when  not  liable  to  mis- 
take, they  lack  the  terseness  of  this  and  that,  and  when  there 
is  any  doubt  as  to  their  application  they  are  in  no  respect 
better  than  the  shorter  words.  Boswell  relates  of  Dr.  John- 
son that  he  avoided  the  use  of  "  the  former  "  and  "  the  latter," 
because  they  put  people  to  the  trouble  of  tracing  backwards 
to  find  what  they  refer  to. 

It  might  well  seem  that  there  could  be  no  excuse  for  not 
knowing  when  to  use  the  singular  and  when  the  plural  of  this 
and  that,  but  experience  proves  that  it  is  possible  to  err  even 
here,  and  that  the  subject  is  really  not  so  simple  as  it  seems. 
But  few  nouns  that  include  a  plural  number  under  a  singular 
term  admit  of  these  or  those.     We  might  say  : 

The  company  were  invited. 
The  mob  were  breaking  into  the  jail. 

but  it  would  not  be  admissible  to  say:  "these  company," 
"  these  class,"  "  those  mob,"  "  those  army."  Yet  such 
examples  are  to  be  found  : 

"  When  you  and  those  poore  number  saued  with  you 
Hung  on  our  driuing  boate." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Twelfe  Night,"  ii.,  2. 

"  These  kind  of  sufferings." — Bp.  Sherlock. 

This  last  is  the  most  common  form  of  the  error.  Yet  there 
are  a  few,  a  very  few,  singular  nouns  that  may  be  preceded 


542  English  Grammar. 

by  these  or  those.  We  may  safely  reckon  on  people,  gentry, 
cavalry,  infantry,  cattle,  poultry,  vermin.  I  do  not  think  that 
we  can  include  the  aristocracy,  nobility,  clergy,  society,  yeo- 
manry, peasantry,  artillery,  militia,  nor  do  I  think  that  any 
well  defined  distinction  exists. 

The  personal  pronominal  forms  that  express  possession 
are,  at  the  present  day,  so  far  as  syntax  is  concerned,  divisi- 
ble into  two  classes,  of  shorter  and  longer  forms  : 


my 

mine 

our 

ours 

thy 

thine 

your 

yours 

his 

his 

her 

hers 

its 

its 

their 

theirs 

His  and  its  are  the  same  for  both.  Now  the  shorter  are 
always  employed  with  nouns,  the  longer  without.  In  the 
present  state  of  the  language  the  former  are  adjectives,  the 
latter  are  not.  They  are  therefore  possessive  cases  of  the 
personal  pronouns.  Neither  alone  are  equal  to  the  possessive 
cases  of  nouns,  with  which  they  may  be  thus  compared  : 

This  is  Mrs.  Ashton's  carriage.  This  is  her  carriage. 

It  is  Mrs.  Ashton's.  It  is  hers. 

The  possessive  of  the  noun  may  be  used  with  or  without  a 
noun  following,  which  can  only  be  done  by  the  two  pronomi- 
nal forms  supplementing  each  other. 

What  is  called  the  double  possessive  is  found  both  in 
nouns  and  pronouns. 

He  was  riding  a  horse  of  the  Doctor's. 

The  explanation  that  has  been  usually  given  is  that  this 
means  a  horse  of  (from  or  out  of)  the  Doctor's  horses.  This 
is  seen  more  clearly  in  the  Spanish : 

"  Un  pintor  c^lebre  ofrecia  un  cuadro  de  los  suyos." 

Whether  such  an  explanation  be  good  or  not,  the  double 
genitive  is  a  well-established  form  of  expression,  and  is  some- 
times convenient  to  distinguish  between  a  picture  of  my 
friend  and  a  picture  of  my  friend's. 


Syntax.  543 

Each  and  every  express  plurality  under  a  singular  form, 
and  both  require  singular  verbs.  They  equally  represent 
aggregates,  considered  one  by  one.  Each  marks  the  separa- 
tion into  units  more  distinctly  than  every  does.  Either  may 
be  followed  by  one  or  by  a  noun  ;  but  ruery  cannot  go  alone: 

"  Sweare  his  thought  ouer 
By  ecu:h  particular  Starre  in  Heaven." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Winters  Tale,"  i.,  2. 
"The  prayers  of  priests  and  people  were  every  moment  inter- 
rupted by  their  sobs.  Carlyle  :  "  Fr.  Revel.,"  I.,  i.,  i. 

Each  and  every,  although  singular,  are,  sometimes,  associ- 
ated with  plural  nouns  or  pronouns,  either  needlessly  or 
to  indicate  that  the  units  are  thought  of  one  by  one  : 

"  Grood  husbands,  let  us  every  one  go  home." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Merry  Wives,"  v.,  5. 
"  Kind  uncle,  woe  were  we  each  one. 
If  harm  should  hap  to  Brother  John." 

Scott  :  "Marmion,"  i.,  22. 

"  They  suspect  each  other"  is  equivalent  to  they  each  suspect 
the  other.  Taken  any  way  the  expression  is  anomalous,  and 
makes  no  intelligible  distinction  between  subject  and  object. 
Omit  they,  and  each  suspects  the  other  is  plain  enough. 

Either  and  both  are  dual  in  signification,  but  while  both 
means  the  two,  either  is  only  one  of  the  two  : 

You  may  have  either  sister,  but  not  both. 

Either  being  confined  to  two,  "  Either  he  or  his  father  or 
his  brother  "  would  be  incorrect ;  so  also  is  "  either  one'  of 
the  ten."  Either  is  incorrectly  but  not  un frequently  used 
for  each  : 

"  The  chief  officers  of  either  army  were  present." 

Thackeray  :  "  Henry  Esmond,"  ii.,  4. 

"  In  the  midst  of  the  street  of  it,  and  on  either  side  of  the  river, 
was  there  the  tree  of  life."  Rev.  xxii.,  2. 


544  English  Grammar. 

Some  and  any  apply  equally  to  any  number.  They  have 
this  curious  distinction  that  some  is  affirmative,  any  inter- 
rogative or  negative  : 

I  never  had  any  talent  for  music  ;  do  you  think  that  my  daugh- 
ter has  any  i    Yes,  she  certainly  has  some. 

The  interrogative  and  relative  pronouns,  which  are  to  a 
great  extent  the  same  words,  are  especially  liable  to  become 
the  victims  of  misunderstanding.     To  say 

Whom  did  you  say  you  saw  at  the  ball  ? 

is  correct,  but, 

Whom  did  you  say  was  at  the  ball  ? 

is  incorrect.  In  the  first  question  whom  is  the  object  of  saw, 
in  the  second  it  is  the  subject  of  was.  In  neither  case  does  it 
depend  upon  say,  although  that  is  the  word  that  occasions 
the  confusion. 

"  Whom  do  men  say  that  I,  the  Son  of  man,  am  ?  " 

Matt,  xvi.,  14. 

Of  course  the  Revised  Version  has  Who,  but  in  other  re- 
spects I  do  not  think  the  passage  improved.  This  confusion 
of  cases  is  very  common,  in  unstudied  speech  more  common 
than  correct  discrimination.  So  foreign  to  our  habits  of 
thought  is  the  idea  of  case,  except  the  possessive,  that 
although  only  four  words  in  the  language  have  any,  we 
habitually  blunder  about  them  : 

"  Who  can  he  take  after  ? "    "  Who  the  devil  is  he  talking  to  ?  " 

Sheridan  :  '*  Rivals." 
**  How  ?  thy  wife  ? 
I  Sir  :  whom  I  thanke  heauen  is  an  honest  woman." 

Shakesp.:  '*  Measure  for  Measure,"  ii.,  i. 

The  presence  of  the  conjunction  than  helps  to  confuse  the 
mind  as  to  the  case  of  the  relative.  Very  many  persons 
would  see  nothing  incorrect  in 

He  is  five  years  older  than  me  ; 


Syntax.  545 

yet  than  has  no  effect  upon  case,  and  the  real  meaning  is 

He  is  five  years  older  than  /  am. 
This  confusion  of  case  is  especially  frequent : 

"  Belial  came  last,  than  whom  a  spirit  more  lewd 
Fell  not  from  heaven." 

Milton  :  "Paradise  Lost,"  i.,  491. 
**  Accepted  Howard,  than  whom  knight 
Was  never  dubbed  more  bold  in  fight." 

This  confusion  is  most  frequent  when  the  relative  and 
antecedent  are  of  different  cases,  and  one  of  them  is  sup- 
pressed. The  other  is  then  left  to  perform  the  part  of  both, 
and  cannot  be  in  two  cases  at  once.  What  is  the  only  word 
that  can  be  both  subject  and  object. 

He  whom  I  accuse  has  entered 

is  complete  ;  but  if  either  "  he  "  or  "  whom  "  were  omitted 
the  hiatus  would  lead  to  confusion. 

^^  Him  I  accuse 
The  City  Ports  by  this  hath  entered." 

Shakesp.  :  "  Coriolanus,"  v.,  5. 

"  Better  to  leaue  vndone,  then  by  our  deed 
Acquire  too  high  a  Fame,  when  him  we  serues  away." 

"  Antony  and  Cleopatra,"  iii.,  i. 

"  Edward  *  *  *  at  length  drew  a  pocket  pistol,  and  threaten- 
ing to  shoot  whomsoever  dared  to  stop  him." 

Scott  t  "  Waverley,"  xxx. 

"  The  original  papers,  together  with  the  scarlet  letter  itself 
*  *  *  are  still  in  my  possession,  and  shall  be  freely  exhibited 
to  whomsoei'cr,  induced  by  the  great  interest  of  the  narrative,  may 
desire  a  sight  of  them." — Hawthorne. 

When  .two  words  in  a  sentence,  alike  capable  of  being 
antecedent,  are  followed  by  a  relative,  it  should  refer  to  the  . 
second.     In 

The  father  of  the  boys  of  whom  we  were  speaking, 
35 


546  E^iglish  Grammar. 

whom  is  to  be  understood  as  relating  to  boys  ;  but  if  one  of 
the  nouns  cannot  correctly  be  the  antecedent,  the  relative  is 
to  be  understood  as  referring  to  the  other. 

The  father  of  these  boys,  who  was  drowned  last  year. 

Here  the  antecedent  must  be  father. 

When  one  or  more  nouns  and  a  personal  pronoun,  mean- 
ing the  same  person,  come  together,  the  pronoun  is  the 
leading  word,  and  determines  the  number,  gender,  and 
person. 

"  I,  Benjamin  Harrison,  President  of  the  United  States,  do  issue 
this  my  proclamation." 

"  Thou  James  of  Douglas  wert  the  man." 

But  when  two  nouns  or  pronouns  stand  as  subject  and 
predicate,  a  relative  following  agrees  with  the  last. 

//  was  an  orphan  girl  who  had  gathered  them  with  her  own 
hands. 

King,  Lords,  and  Commons  are  a.  form  of  Government  which 
is  believed  by  the  English  people  to  be  the  best  suited  to  their 
present  wants. 

"  I  am  the  man  that  hath  seen  affliction  by  the  rod  of  his 
wrath." — Lam.  iii.,  r. 

The  errors  and  mistakes  connected  with  the  use  of  the 
pronouns  probably  outnumber  all  others  in  the  language ; 
and  for  this  two  reasons  may  be  at  least  conjectured.  The 
simplest  is  that  they  alone  trouble  us  with  their  cases.  The 
other  and  deeper  reason  is  connected  with  their  great  irregu- 
larity. Both  are,  I  think,  due  to  their  being  little  words 
with  no  tangible  or  permanent  meanings  of  their  own,  ex- 
pressing only  ever-changing  relations,  flitting,  flickering 
about,  applicable  to  everything  by  turns,  and  constantly 
liable  to  have  their  old  forms  and  meanings  forgotten  and 
intermixed.  Innumerable  examples  might  be  furnished  of 
the  confusion  that  prevails  in  the  use  of  pronouns,  but  I 
shall  instance  only  one  in  addition  to  those  already  given. 
It  is  one  to  which  writers  and  speakers  of  all  grades  have 


Syntax.  547 

been  prone  for  three  hundred  years,  and  more,  from  Bishop 
Latimer  to  Mr.  Gladstone  : 

"This  is,  perhaps,  the  truth  of  all  others,  most  harmoniously 
re-echoed  by  every  philosopher  of  every  school." 

Sir  William  Hamilton. 

Sir  Walter  Raleigh  furnishes  a  quaint  form  of  this  sole- 
cism, when  he  says  that  Richard  III.  was  the  most  heartless 
tyrant  "  of  all  that  forewent  him.''  If  long  and  wide  usage 
and  illustrious  names  can  legitimize  an  absurdity,  this  must 
be  very  nearly  standard  English.     Still  it  is  not  universal. 

A  verb  agrees  with  its  subject  or  nominative  in  number 
and  person  so  far  as  it  is  capable  of  distinguishing  these  ; 
but  that  is  really  to  a  very  small  extent.  For  most  practical 
purposes  a  verb  has  but  two  forms,  and  as  often  only  one. 
The  present  tense  has  one  form  for  the  third  person  singular 
and  one  for  all  other  purposes  ;  the  past  tense  is  alike 
throughout.  All  singular  pronouns  and  singular  nouns, 
even  when  they  represent  numbers  acting  together  as  uni- 
ties, are  followed  by  singular  verbs.  When  the  subject  is 
plural  so  also  is  the  verb.  Several  nominatives  united  by 
and  or  shown  in  any  other  way  to  join  alike  in  the  action  of 
the  verb  require  a  plural. 

The  teacher  and\as  wife  and  three  children  were  crossing  the  field. 

There  is  here  a  grammatical  equality  and  community  in  the 
action,  which  is  wanting  in 

The  teacher,  with  his  wife  and  three  children  was  crossing  the  field. 

This  latter  is  equivalent  to 

The  teacher  was  crossing  the  field  with  his  wife  and  three  children. 

That  was  the  manner  of  his  crossing.     The  other  persons 
were  only  an  accompaniment. 

When  several  persons  are  designated  with  the  understand- 
ing that  only  one  is  to  act,  but  it  is  left  undetermined  which 
one,  the  verb  is  singular. 

John  or  James  or  Thomas  or  Mary  is  sure  to  be  at  home. 


548  English  Grammar. 

If  the  alternate  subjects  be  all  singular  or  all  plural,  the 
number  of  the  verb  obviously  must  agree ;  but  if  one  be 
singular  and  another  plural,  the  verb  cannot  agree  with 
both. 

The  strikers  or  the  company  has  (or  have)  to  give  way. 

As  a  matter  of  convenience,  and  to  make  an  end  of  strife,  it 
is  tacitly  accepted  that  the  verb  shall  agree  with  the  last ; 
and  it  looks  least  incongruous  when  that  is  the  plural. 

A  verb,  not  imperative  or  infinitive,  is  always  of  the  third 
person  unless  its  nominative  be  a  pronoun  of  the  first  or 
second  person.  In  a  dependent  sentence  whose  subject  is 
a  relative,  that  relative,  and  consequently  its  verb,  should 
agree  with  the  antecedent  in  number  and  person. 

I  who  stand  here  saw  those  things  ; 
not 

I  who  stands. 

When  several  nominatives  differing  in  person  are  united 
under  one  verb,  the  first  preference  is  given  to  the  first 
person,  the  next  to  the  second.  We  is  any  aggregate  that 
includes  the  speaker,  you  is  any  that  excludes  the  speaker 
but  includes  the  person  spoken  to. 

When  two  or  more  nominatives  to  be  taken  as  alterna- 
tives differ  in  person  or  number,  the  verb  should  agree  with 
the  one  nearest  to  it.  This  is  a  point  on  which  authorities 
do  not  agree.     Of  these  two  sentences : 

They  or  I  am  in  error. 
They  or  I  are  in  error, 

some  prefer  the  one  and  some  the  other.  The  following 
considerations  are  in  favor  of  the  first.  Either  sentence  is 
elliptical,  being  in  full : 

They  are  in  error,  or  I  am  in  error. 

Supplying  the  necessary  words  the  two  will  read, 

They  are  or  I  am  in  error. 
They,  or  I  am,  are  in  error. 


Syntax.  549 

The  second  absurdly  thrusts  "  /  am  "  between  They  and  its 
verb.  All  such  sentences  are  extremely  awkward,  and  had 
better  be  avoided  altogether.  We  are  under  no  obligation 
to  write  inelegantly,  merely  to  show  our  preference  for  one 
barbarism  over  another.  The  presence  of  either  would 
make  no  difference,  as  it  would  merely  supplement  or. 

A  verb,  transitive  or  intransitive,  is  often  followed  by  a 
word  of  kindred  meaning,  as  its  real  or  apparent  object.  To 
tell  a  tale,  to  sing  a  song,  to  run  a  race,  to  throw  a  throw,  to 
play  plays,  to  live  a  virtuous  life,  to  die  a  violent  death,  to 
smile  a  ghastly  smile,  are  examples.  Such  expressions 
might  be  so  arranged  in  a  series  that  while  in  the  first  the 
noun  would  be  unquestionably  the  object  of  the  verb,  in  the 
last  no  action  on  the  object  is  thought  of.  When  Balaam 
prayed  : 

"  Let  me  die  the  death  of  the  righteous," 

he  could  not  have  supposed  that  his  dying  would  have  any 
effect  upon  the  "  death  of  the  righteous."  He  merely 
desired  that  he  might  die  as  righteous  men  die.  The  words 
"  the  death  of  the  righteous,"  in  form  the  object  of  the  verb, 
are  in  signification  an  adverbial  clause,  expressive  of  manner 
and  not  substance. 

There  are  yet  others  of  the  same  form  in  which  the  noun 
is  still  farther  from  being  the  object  of  the  verb. 

"  I  sit  a  queen,  and  am  no  widow." — Rev.  xviii.,  7. 

Queen  cannot  be  the  object  of  sit.  The  meaning  bears  no 
analogy  to  that  of  sitting  a  spirited  horse.  Queen  is  really  in 
apposition  with  /,  and  would  be  nominative  if  we  had  such 
a  separate  case.  It  is  so  in  the  Greek  and  in  the  Latin 
version  of  Beza.     A  more  lucid  rendering  would  be 

I  sit  as  a  queen  ; 

and  we  might  amend  in  the  same  manner  all  sentences  like 

He  walked  forth  a  free  man. 

The  so-called  substantive  verb — to  be — has  the  same  case 
before  and  after  it.    To  this  there  are  apparent  exceptions : 


550  English  Grammar. 

These  books  are  John's. 

The  sentence  is  elliptical,  and  if  filled  up  would  be  either : 
These  books  are  John's  books,  or.  These  are  John's  books. 
Is  that  you,  John  ?     Yes,  it  is  me. 

If  this  be  correct,  it  is  still  contrary  to  general  analogy,  and 
sets  all  rule  and  reason  at  defiance.  It  is  very  common  but 
not  yet  quite  classical  English. 

All  passive  verbs  in  English  are  made  with  the  help  of  the 
verb  to  be,  and  take  the  same  case  after  as  before  them  : 

He  was  elected  governor.    They  were  appointed  commissioners. 

As  nouns  have  no  distinctive  case  except  the  possessive,  the 
fact  is  not  of  much  practical  importance,  but  it  helps  to 
illustrate  the  construction  of  the  infinitive. 
The  infinitive  is  used  in  four  different  ways  : 

a.  It  follows  the  auxiliaries  and  a  few  other  verbs  incorrectly 
employed  in  the  same  manner. 

b.  It  follows  a  number  of  verbs  and  adjectives  that  pre- 
sent a  probability  of  something.  Seem,  hope,  fear,  promise, 
threaten,  able,  willing,  and  apt  are  examples : 

She  seemed  to  recover.     He  promised  to  pay. 

c.  Many  verbs  in  English,  and  still  more  in  other  languages, 
expressing  the  action  of  the  senses,  of  power  or  intelligence, 
are  followed  by  an  infinitive  expressing  the  action  of  another 
person.  The  word  representing  the  second  person  (or  thing,) 
at  once  the  object  of  the  first  verb  and  the  subject  of  the 
second,  is  in  the  objective  case,  if  there  be  any  such  case 
distinguishable  : 

"  Then  Esther  bade  them  return  Mordecai  this  answer." 

"  If  thou  puttest  me  to  use  the  carnal  weapon  it  will  be  worse  for 
you." 

"  He  *  *  *  led  the  way  to  the  pavilion,  loudly  ordering  the 
banquet  to  be  spread." 

''''Imagine  this  to  be  the  palace  of  your  pleasure." 

"  I  hope  he  takes  me  to  be  flesh  and  blood." 


Syntax.  551 

Several  infinitives  may  follow  each  other : 

^\i&  persuaded  him  to  pretend  to  agree  to  do  as  they  required. 

The  verb  preceding  the    infinitive  may  be  passive.      The 
subject  of  the  infinitive  then  becomes  nominative. 

They  bade  me  stand  up.     I  was  bidden  stand  up. 

If  they  were  retained,  it  would  be  transformed  into  by  them  : 

"  Some  were  heard  to  curse  the  shrine 
Where  others  knelt  to  pray." 

d.  The  infinitive  is  used,  but  not  very  frequently,  as  a 
verbal  noun : 

"  If  all  the  yeare  were  playing  holidaies, 
To  sport  would  be  as  tedious  as  to  worke." 

Shakesp.  :  I  "  Henry  IV.,"  i.,  2. 


CHAPTER  X. 
SUGGESTIONS  TO  YOUNG  WRITERS. 

It  is  with  more  than  usual  diffidence  that  I  add  a  closing 
chapter  for  the  benefit  of  young  and  inexperienced  writers, 
giving  some  words  of  counsel  beyond  the  mere  details  of 
grammar.  What  follows  is  not  intended  to  instruct  those 
who  are  already  accomplished  and  elegant  writers.  Nor  is  it 
intended  to  teach  any  one  how  to  become  an  eminent  and 
successful  author  in  any  department  of  literature  ;  the  pur- 
pose is  the  more  modest  one  of  helping  the  unskilful  to  tell 
a  plain  matter  in  a  plain  and  effective  way.  There  are  a 
great  number  of  persons  who  sometime  in  their  lives,  and 
perhaps  often,  have  occasion  to  write  something  of  sufficient 
importance  to  be  worth  writing  well ;  and  it  is  to  these  that 
I  address  myself.  For  sake  of  brevity  the  principles  and 
illustrations  will  be  put  in  the  form  of  direct  address  to  the 
reader. 

I.  The  idea  which  the  reader  has  of  the  writer,  or  the 
hearer's  opinion  of  the  speaker,  is  of  the  first  importance.  If 
the  speaker  or  writer  be  thought  insincere,  or  to  be  hypo- 
critically urging  his  own  interest,  his  words  are  vain.  There 
is  somewhere  in  the  economy  of  the  human  mind  a  kind  of 
cut-off,  capable,  when  called  into  action,  of  excluding  all 
impressions.  When  that  valve  is  closed  cherubic  wisdom 
could  not  find  an  entrance.  Though  your  eloquence  drop 
as  the  rain  it  will  run  off  as  from  the  back  of  a  tortoise. 
Valuable  above  all  the  arts  of  rhetoric  will  be  a  general  belief 
that  you  are  too  upright  to  deceive  and  too  careful  and 
clear-headed  to  be  deceived — that  in  all  probability  what  you 
have  to  say  is  true,  and  truth  worth  listening  to.     Such  a 

552 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  553 

reputation  cannot  be  acquired  and  maintained  without 
deserving  it. 

II.  It  is  well  to  know  the  subject  you  are  to  write  about,  and 
know  it  thoroughly.  There  is  a  great  advantage  in  knowing 
more  of  a  subject  than  any  one  else  does ;  and  that  is  often 
possible  enough  if  it  be  a  small  one  and  somewhat  personal 
to  yourself.  But  when  a  large  field  is  to  be  covered  informa- 
tion must  be  collected  ;  and  that  is  often  a  work  of  great 
labor.  A  laborious  German  author  has  said  that  he  has 
sometimes  condensed  into  a  parenthetic  clause  the  results  of 
a  month's  search.  Still  such  labor  is  generally  well  bestowed. 
Spare  no  pains  to  get  at  the  facts,  and  make  sure  that  they 
are  facts.  It  is  humiliating,  and  may  be  disastrous,  to  find 
in  the  crisis  for  which  you  are  preparing  that  your  facts  turn 
out  to  be  fictions.  In  collecting  facts  that  are  beyond  your 
own  knowledge,  and  not  of  public  notoriety,  write  each  one 
down  plainly  on  a  slip  of  paper,  carefully  adding  the  source 
(book,  page,  etc.)  from  which  it  was  obtained.  All  slips 
bearing  upon  the  same  point  should  be  put  together  into  an 
envelope,  also  plainly  marked.  Such  envelopes  can  be  ar- 
ranged alphabetically.  If  this  plan  be  well  carried  out,  all 
the  information  you  can  ever  collect  may  be  arranged  so 
that  you  can  lay  your  hand  in  a  minute  upon  all  that* you 
have  on  any  required  point. 

Every  subject  touches  upon  the  boundaries  of  many 
others,  and  it  is  often  necessary  to  reconnoitre  the  borders 
of  these  adjacent  territories.  Hence  the  importance  of  wide 
and  general  knowledge  having  its  central  point  in  the  busi- 
ness in  which  you  are  especially  interested.  A  clergyman 
who  was  a  diligent  student  once  said  to  me  that  he  kept  one 
foot  of  his  compasses  on  the  Bible,  and  with  the  other  swept 
over  everything  within  reasonable  distance. 

Patiently  hear,  diligently  seek  for,  and  judge  with  judicial 
fairness  every  adverse  fact  and  argument,  so  that  you  may 
not  be  disarmed  by  sudden  objections.  In  doing  this  you 
will  probably  find  that  upon  subjects  in  which  the  public  are 
not  actively  interested  their  ideas  are  very  crude  and  imper- 
fect, and  that  in  reference  to  others  in  which  they  take  an 


554  English  Grammar. 

active  part  many  of  the  arguments,  assertions,  and  catch- 
words that  pass  from  mouth  to  mouth  on  both  sides,  and  are 
borne  about  by  every  wind  that  blows,  are  without  value. 
Dr.  Franklin  had  a  way  of  applying  one  of  the  principal 
methods  of  algebra  to  social  and  political  questions.  He 
arranged  on  opposite  sides  all  the  facts  and  arguments  for 
and  against  any  proposition,  and  then  proceeded  to  cancel 
all  that  seemed  to  be  worthless  or  to  balance  each  other ; 
and  he  formed  his  judgment  upon  the  remainder.  If  the 
subject  to  be  treated  involves  a  succession  of  dates,  labor 
will  be  saved  by  arranging  these  on  a  separate  slip.  When 
you  are  ready  to  write,  the  necessary  memorandums  can  be 
picked  out  and  arranged  in  the  order  in  which  they  are  to  be 
used.  It  will  be  a  great  advantage  in  writing  to  have  all  the 
material  either  ready  in  your  mind  or  conveniently  placed 
before  you. 

III.  Having  collected  the  necessary  material,  and  weeded 
out  ail  that  is  irrelevant,  the  next  point  is  to  consider  well 
the  bearing  of  each  fact  upon  the  others  and  upon  the  propo- 
sition which  you  wish  to  establish.  In  doing  this  it  is  best 
to  be  thoroughly  honest  with  yourself.  In  giving  your  facts 
to  the  public  you  may  perhaps  choose  to  present  them 
in  a  sort  of  dress  parade — each  one  of  course  a  real  soldier 
and  not  a  dummy  in  clothes — but  for  your  own  purposes 
it  is  better  to  view  them  in  the  undress  of  the  arena  with- 
out a  tag  of  ornament  on  them.  You  will  thus  come  to 
have  a  distinct  bird's-eye  view  of  the  subject  as  a  whole. 

In  order  to  write  effectively  you  must  write  clearly  ;  and 
for  that  clear  thinking  is  indispensable.  An  artist,  an  archi- 
tect, or  machinist  has  his  whole  subject  so  clear  in  his  mental 
view  as  to  see  at  once  the  effect  that  would  follow  a  change 
in  any  of  the  parts.  I  have  seen  a  chess-player  lie  down 
upon  a  sofa  with  his  face  to  the  wall  and  play  against  one  a 
little  less  expert,  and  win  the  game  without  once  seeing  the 
board  from  beginning  to  end.  He  must  have  maintained 
throughout  a  mental  picture  showing  the  position  of  every 
piece,  and  seen  the  effect  of  every  move,  and  the  perfect 
accuracy  of  his  conceptions  was  proved  by  the  result.     This 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  555 

is  an  ideal  of  clear  thinking  on  a  special  subject,  but  an  ideal 
to  be  aspired  towards  in  all.  I  feel  shy  of  a  doctrine  that  is 
unthinkable, — of  an  action  that  cannot  be  mentally  repre- 
sented. It  will  be  a  useful  exercise  to  practise  upon  the 
various  questions  that  may  arise,  not  only  finding  answers 
to  them,  but  tracing  with  all  possible  accuracy  the  steps  by 
which  results  are  brought  about,  and  the  principles  on  which 
they  depend.  I  give  four  questions  in  illustration,  which 
are  at  your  service  until  better  occur  to  you. 

1.  If  the  money  in  a  country  amount  to  $10  per  capita, 
and  in  ten  years  steadily  advance  till  it  reach  $20,  and  then 
in  other  ten  years  recede  to  $10,  it  will  pass  twice  over  the 
ratio  of  $15.  What  will  be  the  difference  in  effect  upon 
public  prosperity  and  feeling  between  the  ascending  and  the 
descending  ratio  of  $15  ? 

2.  Gresham,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  showed  that  bad 
money  drives  out  good  ;  and  now  it  is  found  that  the  Euro- 
pean rat  drives  out  the  Australian  rat ;  do  the  two  phe- 
nomena depend  on  the  same  principle  ? 

3.  Why  is  there  a  limit  to  the  size  of  animals? 

4.  Illustrate  the  principle  of  the  syllogism  to  the  eye  by  a 
diagram. 

Here  is  the  fittest  place  to  point  out  a  useful  distinction 
between  a  question  of  fact  and  one  of  propriety  or  expedi- 
ency. A  question  of  fact  is  comparatively  simple.  An 
assertion  put  forth  as  an  existing  fact  is  true,  or  it  is  not 
true,  or  it  differs  from  the  truth  by  a  measurable  quantity. 
If  it  is  true  that  J.  Wilkes  Booth  assassinated  President 
Lincoln,  there  is  nothing  in  the  universe  of  the  least  validity 
to  disprove  it.  But  a  question  of  advisability  has  generally 
two  good  sides.  It  depends  upon  the  effects  of  a  proposed 
action  ;  but  those  effects  are  multifarious,  some  favorable 
and  others  unfavorable,  and  few  of  them  definitely  ascer- 
tainable. A  tariff  or  currency  question  is  an  equation 
involving  an  indefinite  number  of  unknown  quantities. 
Hence  it  is  best  to  give  priority  to  the  ascertainment  of 
facts,  partly  because  it  is  comparatively  simple  and  partly 
because  the  facts  may  help  to  determine  the  expediency, 


556  English  Grammar. 

but  no  considerations  of  expediency — of  profit  or  loss — can 
make  or  unmake  a  fact. 

IV.  Having  mastered  a  subject  in  its  details  and  as  a 
whole  it  is  next  to  be  considered  in  what  order  you  will  pre- 
sent it.  There  is  generally  some  one  preferable  to  all  others. 
If  much  depend  upon  dates,  a  chronological  order  will  proba- 
bly be  best.  But  this  is  only  a  single  exemplification  of  a 
broader  principle  that  when  one  thing  is  necessary  to  the 
understanding  of  another  the  explanatory  one  should  come 
first.  The  reason  is  that  it  is  useless  to  present  what  the 
reader  is  not  prepared  to  understand.  You  must  divine  as 
best  you  can  what  he  already  knows  and  thinks,  begin  at 
that  point  and  lead  him  on  step  by  step.  If  an  unbridged 
gap  intervene  your  words  will  be  wasted.  It  is  better  to  go 
back  a  little  and  recapitulate  briefly  and  clearly  what  most 
people  know  already  than  run  the  risk  of  losing  connection. 
Many  a  fine  discourse  has  been  as  water  spilt  on  the  sand 
because  it  connected  with  nothing  in  the  mind  of  the  hearer. 
I  once  heard  Professor  Pierce  of  Harvard  deliver  a  public  lec- 
ture in  which  he  repeatedly  alluded  in  a  passing  careless  way  to 
the  great  advantages  derived  from  the  method  oi />o/ars,  just 
as  if  every  one  were  perfectly  familiar  with  it ;  whereas  it  is 
not  likely  that  one  in  ten  had  ever  heard  of  polars  before. 
Hence  in  addressing  a  mixed  audience  it  is  better  to  aim 
a  little  below  the  average  intelligence,  occasionally  adding 
something  to  satisfy  the  better  class  of  minds.  We  are  some- 
times vexed  by  worthy  people  who  out  of  extreme  politeness 
assume  that  we  know  everything  already,  and  that  it  is  only 
necessary  to  allude  delicately  to  a  point  here  and  there  by 
way  of  refreshing  our  memories. 

The  essential  kernel  of  a  book,  a  review,  or  newspaper 
article  can  often  be  stated  in  a  single  sentence,  of  which  all 
the  rest  is  only  evidence  and  amplification.  The  reader 
should  never  be  left  at  a  loss  to  know  what  that  essential 
point  is.  But  we  often  read  articles  or  hear  addresses  every 
sentence  of  which,  taken  alone,  is  passably  good,  while  we 
are  sadly  puzzled  to  know  what  the  whole  is  about.  Such 
want  of  point  is  a  fatal  defect. 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  557 

In  unfolding  a  subject  step  by  step  it  will  naturally  and 
without  any  special  effort  fall  into  a  succession  of  short 
divisions  called  paragraphs,  each  one  of  which  will  be  seen  to 
present  a  consideration,  argument,  or  little  group  of  closely 
connected  facts  easily  distinguished  from  those  of  any  other 
similar  division.  The  paragraph  is  a  great  feature  in  modern 
authorship,  and  is  in  the  interest  of  that  clearness  and  dis- 
tinctness so  much  prized  by  an  active  practical  people.  The 
most  valuable  facts  lose  their  force  if  they  get  mixed  up 
criss-cross-wise. 

V.  The  language  or  choice  of  words  to  be  employed  is  of 
very  great  importance.  Habitual  reading  of  the  best  books 
and  associating  with  the  best  accessible  company  will  with- 
out any  particular  effort  on  your  part  supply  a  stock  of  words 
suflficient  for  most  purposes.  One  who  aspires  higher  may 
go  through  a  large  dictionary  and  mark  unfamiliar  words 
that  seem  likely  to  be  valuable  acquisitions,  and  afterwards 
go  over,  or  even  copy  out,  the  words  marked.  Idiomatic 
expressions  can  be  got  from  people  who  live  far  from  cities, 
old  books,  and  the  by-ways  of  literature. 

Words  should  be  appropriate  to  the  subject,  and,  as  far  as 
possible,  familiar  to  the  persons  addressed.  Every  considera- 
ble field  of  human  endeavor  has  its  own  vocabulary,  and  if 
you  know  a  subject  well  you  know  its  appropriate  terms, 
yet  many  of  these  are  to  be  addressed  only  to  experts.  In 
relating  to  sailors  your  experience  at  sea  use  nautical  phrases 
liberally,  but  not  in  telling  the  same  thing  to  farmers.  Do 
not  address  long  Latin  words  to  children  or  wheel-barrow 
men,  and  never  shoot  over  the  heads  of  an  auditory,  making 
a  noise  in  the  air  and  hitting  nothing.  Generally  speaking 
it  is  not  well  to  use  two  words  where  one  is  enough,  or  a 
long  word  where  a  short  one  will  serve  the  purpose.  Yet 
one  long  word  may  be  preferable  to  several  short  ones.  A 
succession  of  monosyllables  is  not  elegant,  and  we  tire  of  a 
threadbare  diction  as  readily  as  of  one  overloaded  with  orna- 
ment. If  phosphomolybdic  be  the  one  word  that  expresses 
your  meaning,  that  is  the  one  to  use,  no  matter  for  its  length. 
Let  all  your  words  be  English,  sound  reliable  English,  and 


558  English  Grammar. 

nothing  but  English ;  and  when  you  speak  of  a  spade  call  it 
by  its  name,  and  when  you  mean  kypercssihesia,  say  so. 

A  good  deal  has  been  said  of  late  years  about  writing  and 
speaking  vigorous  Anglo-Saxon,  sometimes,  perhaps,  by 
persons  who  would  not  know  Anglo-Saxon  if  they  saw  it. 
The  clamor — for  it  sometimes  amounts  to  that — is  of  the 
nature  of  a  reaction  against  a  style  that  long  ago  grew  to  be 
an  abuse.  But  a  reaction  against  anything  extreme  is  itself 
apt  to  be  an  extreme.  In  the  second  chapter  of  this  work 
I  have  spoken  of  the  several  sources  of  English,  and  of  the 
limited  capabilities  of  any  of  the  elements  alone.  Not  only 
do  we  speak  a  mixed  language,  but  almost  every  sentence  is 
mixed  ;  and  we  cannot  speak  without  using  words  drawn  from 
several  sources.  Our  language  is  like  a  river  formed  by  the 
confluence  of  four  main  streams  and  many  subsidiary  rills. 
The  first  is  the  Anglo-Saxon  element,  most  of  which  is  alike 
familiar  to  all,  and  without  which  scarcely  a  sentence  can  be 
uttered ;  yet  it  has  not  words  for  a  fourth  part  of  the  ideas 
of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  is  more  especially  the  property 
of  the  unlearned.  The  second  is  the  stream  of  classical  words 
introduced  through  the  medium  of  the  French  before  A.D. 
1500.  Wherever  necessary,  they  have  been  so  far  modified 
in  spelling,  pronunciation,  or  meaning,  as  to  become  a  har- 
monious part  of  the  language.  They  have  never  percolated 
downward  to  any  great  extent  below  the  intelligent  indus- 
trious classes.  Thirdly,  there  is  the  direct  Latin  contribution 
connected  with  the  revival  of  learning  in  Europe,  and  dating 
roughly  from  15CX)  to  1800.  During  the  latter  two  thirds  of 
that  period  a  Latin  diction  so  completely  dominated  litera- 
ture as  to  provoke  a  reaction.  The  words  being  pronounced 
according  to  English  analogies  ofifer  no  offence  to  the  ear. 
They  are  more  especially  the  property  of  literary  persons. 
Lastly,  there  are  the  Greek  terms  appropriated  by  science, 
which  have  increased  with  amazing  rapidity  since  the  middle 
of  last  century.  The  greater  part  of  them  are  known  only 
to  scientific  specialists.  Whoever  knows  any  one  of  the 
four  parts  as  enumerated  is  presumably  familiar  with  those 
that  precede.     All  are  equally  proper  in  their  places. 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers. 


559 


It  often  happens  that  we  have  words  of  kindred  meaning 
from  two  or  three  different  sources,  thus  : 


SAXON 

FRENCH 

LATIN 

begin 

commence 

initiate  * 

care 

anxiety 

solicitude 

deal 

traffic 

negotiate 

earn 

deserve 

merit 

feud 

enmity 

hostility 

greedy 

covetous 

mercenary 

harm 

damage 

detriment 

ill-timed 

unseasonable 

inopportune 

kernel 

core 

nucleus 

lessen 

diminish 

extenuate 

mirth 

drollery 

jocularity 

needy 

poor 

indigent 

open 

frank 

ingenuous 

plight 

condition 

predicament 

quicken 

revive 

reanimate 

scold 

blame 

abjurgate 

twit 

reproach 

reprehend 

These  triple  lines,  where  they  exist  unbroken,  afford  a 
valuable  and  much  needed  variety  of  expression  ;  but  in  a 
majority  of  instances  there  are  not  more  than  two,  or  even 
one.  Still,  this  is  not  the  only  source  of  variety.  We  some- 
times find  several  words  nearly  synonymous  where  two  of 
these  lines  are  wanting. 

Adjacent,  adjoining,  contiguous,  conterminous. 
Translucent,  transparent,  transpicuous,  diaphanous. 

When  the  reign  of  Latinity  was  at  its  highest,  it  was  not 
uncommon  to  meet  with  sentences  in  which  every  significant 
word  was  in  some  way  derived  from  that  language. 

"  A  citizen  of  Ancyra  hoidi  prepared  for  his  own  use  a  purple  gar- 
ment; and  this  indiscreet  action,  which,  under  the  reign  of  Con- 
stantius,  would  have  been  considered  a  capital  offense,  was  reported 
to  y^ulian  by  the  officious  importunity  of  sl  private  enemy." 

Gibbon. 

'  American  "  inaugurate." 


560  English  Grammar. 

This  was  the  diction  of  the  schools,  and  was  sometimes 
far  outdone.  In  this  country  those  who  received  what  was 
thought  a  careful  education  fifty  or  sixty  years  ago  were 
taught  to  employ,  both  in  speaking  and  writing,  as  many 
and  as  long  words  of  Latin  origin  as  it  was  possible  to  crowd 
together.     Their  speech  was  full  of  euphemisms  like  these : 

Instead  of  drunkard,  say,  a  gentleman  who  habitually  in- 
dulges in  the  immoderate  use  of  alcoholic  stimulants. 

Scold  :  a  lady  who  permits  herself  to  employ  vituperative 
language,  or  to  apply  epithets. 

Pot :  a  domestic  utensil  adapted  to  culinary  uses.  And 
Dr.  Johnson's  idea  of  a  network  was  "  anything  reticulated 
or  decussated  at  equal  distances  with  interstices  between  the 
intersections" 

Many  worthy  people  became  seemingly  incapable  of  speak- 
ing in  any  other  way.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that 
a  reaction  and  demand  for  Anglo-Saxon  set  in,  or  that  it 
was  sometimes  extreme  and  misjudged.  So  completely  had 
Latinity  overmastered  all  minds  that  those  who  were  most 
anxious  for  Anglo-Saxon  knew  no  Saxon  words  in  which  to 
ask  for  it.  The  following  sentence  is  not  without  a  touch 
of  unintentional  humor  on  that  account. 

"  But  the  coinage  of  anglicised  words  of  Latin  origin  is  still  too 
abundant,  and  either  overload  the  language  by  their  superfluity 
or  enfeeble  it  by  dilution,  and  by  distinctions  without  differences." 

It  is,  however,  of  no  practical  importance  from  what  source 
our  words  are  derived,  so  long  as  they  are  well  understood 
and  their  sound  is  in  harmony  with  the  general  tone  and 
cadence  of  the  language. 

VI.  Sentences  should  be  neither  so  short  as  to  appear 
abrupt  and  jerky,  so  long  as  to  tire  the  reader,  or  so  intricate 
that  he  will  lose  his  way  in  their  windings.  They  are  too 
various  to  admit  of  rules ;  but  in  every  sentence  a  distinct 
and  clear  idea  should  be  clearly  expressed.  These  require- 
ments are  best  appreciated  when  they  have  been  neglected. 
Here  are  two  faulty  sentences  from  the  North  American  Re- 
view^ on  which  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  make  any  comment. 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  561 

**  The  final  proof  of  song  or  personality  is  a  sort  of  matured, 
accreted,  superb,  evoluted,  almost  divine,  impalpable  diffuseness 
and  atmosphere  or  invisible  magnetism,  dissolving  and  embracing 
all,  and  not  any  special  achievement  of  passion,  pride,  metrical 
form,  epigram,  plot,  thought,  or  what  is  called  beauty." — No- 
vember, 1890. 

"  Even  if  man  was  all  that  he  might  be,  woman  would  still 
have  wanted  a  profession,  because  a  cause  appeals  to  latent 
chivalry,  and  because  the  sense  of  personality  has  been  weakened 
by  the  slow  growth  of  causes." — February,  1891. 

Neither  of  these  would  be  made  any  clearer  by  giving  the 
context. 

Before  the  year  1500  English  had  become  a  well  devel- 
oped, lucid,  pleasant  medium  of  communication.  I  give  in 
illustration  a  few  sentences  from  Caxton's  "  History  of 
Troy,"  date  of  147 1,  merely  modernizing  some  of  the  spell- 
ing, as  that  is  not  a  point  of  importance  here. 

"  Then  prayed  the  Greeks  that  they  might  set  the  horse  of 
brass  within  the  temple  of  Pallas,  for  the  restitution  of  the  Pal- 
ladium^ to  the  end  that  the  goddess  Pallas  might  be  to  them 
agreeable  in  their  return.  And  as  the  king  Priam  answered  not 
thereto,  -^neas  and  Antenor  said  to  him  that  it  should  be  well 
done,  and  that  it  should  be  honor  to  the  city  ;  howbeit  the  king 
Priam  accorded  it  with  evil  will.  Then  the  Greeks  received  the 
gold  and  silver  and  the  wheat  that  was  promised  to  them,  and 
sent  and  put  it  into  their  ships.  After  these  things  they  went  all 
in  manner  of  procession  and  in  devotion  with  their  priests,  and 
began  with  strength  of  cords  to  draw  the  horse  of  brass  into  the 
city.  And  for  as  much  as  by  the  gate  it  might  not  enter  into  the 
city,  it  was  so  great,  therefore  they  brake  the  wall  of  the  city  in 
length  and  height  in  such  wise  a^  it  entered  within  the  town  ;  and 
the  Trojans  received  it  with  great  joy." 

It  was  this  style  slightly  modified  that  was  employed  for 

the   successive  translations  of   the  Bible  from  Tyndale  to 

King  James,  which  deserve  more  than  Chaucer  to  be  called 

"the  well  of    English  undefiled."     It  is  toward  this  early 

type  that  the  last  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  is  now  re- 
36 


562  English  Grammar. 

turning.  An  exact  imitation  is  no  longer  possible  or  de- 
sirable; but  its  straightforward  clearness  is  an  admirable 
corrective  of  turgidity,  bombast,  and  obscurity. 

Those  who  make  and  manipulate  laws  have  a  superstition 
that  whatever  they  have  to  say  must  all  be  said  in  one  sen- 
tence, however  many  pages  it  may  fill.  It  is  also  felt  that 
all  contingencies  and  misconceptions  must  be  guarded 
against  by  provisos,  repetitions,  and  explanations.  Hence 
legal  documents  are  wordy,  wearisome,  and  obscure,  and  in 
short  the  worst  of  all  human  compositions.  To  illustrate 
this  labyrinthic  character  of  legal  language,  I  quote  about 
one  third  of  a  sentence  describing  the  boundaries  of  Rock 
Creek  Park  at  Washington.  It  would  not  be  any  clearer  if 
the  other  two  thirds  were  added.  If  any  one  can  understand 
it  I  bow  to  his  superior  intelligence. 

"  The  initial  point  begins  on  the  north  of  the  Blagden  Mills 
road  at  a  point  where  it  is  intersected  by  the  west  line  of  i6th 
street  extended  ;  thence  it  runs  north,  following  the  line  of  i6th 
street  extended  until  intersected  by  a  line  running  from  east  to 
west,  which  line  will  cut  off  from  the  northeastern  part  of  the 
park,  as  mapped  out  on  the  first  trial  map  and  included  between 
the  straight  lines  of  the  said  trial  maps,  as  many  acres  as  the 
present  boundary  lines  will  include  in  the  projection  beyond  the 
west  of  the  straight  lines  in  said  trial  map." 

Latin  had  already  been  the  language  of  law  and  diplo- 
macy for  many  generations  before  the  beginning  of  that 
ascendancy  which  it  attained  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries.  Legal  Latin  then  infected  the  Latin  of 
the  schools  with  its  own  endless  wordiness  and  trivial  pro- 
visos, and  in  time  infected  English  prose,  just  as  the  same 
causes  have  made  the  literary  language  of  Germany  what  it 
now  is.  The  writings  of  some  of  the  great  lights  of  Eng- 
lish literature  are  not  much  more  lively  reading  than  a  deed 
in  entail  or  an  indictment  for  manslaughter.  Milton  wrote 
sentences  of  three  or  four  hundred  words,  and  I  venture  to 
introduce  one  of  the  more  moderate  here  as  an  example  to 
be  avoided  : 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  563 

"  And  for  the  usual  method  of  teaching  arts,  I  deem  it  to  be  an 
old  errour  of  universities,  not  yet  well  recovered  from  the  scho- 
lastic grossness  of  barbarous  ages,  that  instead  of  beginning  with 
arts  most  easy,  (and  those  be  such  as  are  most  obvious  to  the 
sense,)  they  present  their  young  immatriculated  novices  at  first 
coming  with  the  most  intellective  abstractions  of  logic  and  meta- 
physics ;  so  that  they  having  but  newly  left  those  grammatic  flats 
and  shallows  where  they  stuck  unreasonably  to  learn  a  few  words 
with  lamentable  construction,  and  now  on  the  sudden  transported 
under  another  climate  to  be  tossed  and  turmoiled  with  their 
unballasted  wits  in  fathomless  and  unquiet  depths  of  controversy, 
do  for  the  most  part  grow  into  hatred  and  contempt  of  learning, 
mocked  and  deluded  all  this  while  with  ragged  notions  and  bab- 
blements, while  they  expected  worthy  and  delightful  knowledge  ; 
till  poverty  or  youthful  years  call  them  importunately  their 
several  ways,  and  hasten  them  with  the  sway  of  friends  either  to  an 
ambitious  and  mercenary,  or  ignorantly  zealous  divinity  ;  some 
allured  to  the  trade  of  law,  grounding  their  purposes  not  on  the 
prudent  and  heavenly  contemplation  of  justice  and  equity,  which 
was  never  taught  them,  but  on  the  promising  and  pleasing 
thoughts  of  litigious  terms,  fat  contentions,  and  flowing  fees  ; 
others  betake  them  to  state  affairs,  with  souls  so  unprincipled  in 
virtue  and  true  generous  breeding,  that  flattery  and  courtships 
and  tyrannous  aphorisms  appear  to  them  the  highest  points  of 
wisdom  ;  instilling  their  barren  hearts  with  conscientious  slavery  ; 
if,  as  I  rather  think,  it  be  not  feigned." — '*  Of  Education." 

In  vol.  ii.  of  Milton's  prose  works,  edited  by  Symmons,  may 
be  found  at  page  339,  in  certain  articles  of  agreement,  the 
beginning  of  a  sentence  of  910  words,  covering  two  whole 
pages  and  part  of  two  others.  Milton,  although  a  conspicu- 
ous example  of  this  style,  was  no  exception. 

The  combination  of  law  and  Latin  was  thus  developing 
a  language  of  the  learned,  not  in  sympathy  with  the  body 
of  the  people  or  fit  for  any  of  the  purposes  of  active  life. 
Fortunately  it  was  not  permitted  to  continue  as  a  literarj' 
standard.  It  was  first  effectively  met  by  the  pioneers  of  the 
newspaper  press.  The  journalist  does  not  sit  in  a  well 
stocked  library  meditating  theses  for  the  entertainment  of 
scholars.     He  has  to  write  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  often 


564  English  Grammar. 

without  preparation  or  revision,  about  the  events  and  the 
questions  of  the  day  in  a  way  to  interest  and  inform  the 
body  of  the  people.  His  excellences  and  his  shortcomings 
grow  out  of  those  conditions.  Hence  it  is  in  no  small 
degree  due  to  such  literary  hacks  as  L' Estrange  and  Defoe, 
and  their  imitators,  that  there  is  now  in  English  a  literature 
that  can  be  read  and  a  people  who  are  pleased  to  read  it. 

The  long  sentence  with  its  endless  convolutions  was  the 
first  to  give  way,  and  people  were  content  for  more  than  a 
century  to  accept  Latin  and  its  derivatives  in  any  quantity, 
if  only  put  up  in  small  packages,  but  latterly  there  has  been 
an  increasing  demand  for  short  and  simple  native  words.  In 
words  and  in  sentences  it  is  safe  now  to  use  a  good  deal  of 
freedom,  being  careful  only  to  avoid  all  extremes  on  the 
one  hand  and  on  the  other  a  tiresome  monotony. 

Vn.  An  idiom  is  a  figure  of  speech  become  so  familiar  by 
long  use,  that  it  is  no  longer  regarded  as  a  figure,  but  as  a 
literal  truth.  Yet  it  is  like  any  figure  in  this,  that  if  its 
words  be  taken  in  their  primary  literal  meaning  it  is  either 
untrue  or  nonsense. 

He  fell  in  with  a  batch  of  old  salts  spinning  yams. 
"  One  half  the  prayers  with  Jove  acceptance  find, 
The  other  half  he  whistles  down  the  wind." 

The  boundary  between  idiom  and  slang  has  never  been 
established,  or  between  either  and  metaphor.  They  are 
slang  when  too  low  or  coarse.  To  be  an  idiom  an  expression 
must  be  perfectly  established  and  understood.  It  should  be 
shorter  than  any  literal  equivalent,  and  is  then  apt  and 
forcible. 

Idiomatic.     The  fire  has  gone  out. 

Literal.     The  process  of  combustion  has  ceased. 

One  who  attempted  to  avoid  idioms  would  be  insufferably 
stiff  and  tedious. 

While  idioms  should  be  so  old  as  to  be  familiar  to  every- 
body, metaphors  and  similes  are  best  when  perfectly  new. 
They  are  not  only  entirely  proper  but  they  may  be  an 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  565 

admirable  help  when  they  are  apt,  fit  well  in  the  connection 
in  which  they  are  placed  and  occur  naturally  in  your  way  of 
thinking  of  your  subject.  They  are  not  to  be  hunted  down 
and  dragged  in  by  force. 

Anecdotes,  if  well  managed,  are  of  great  use  in  oral  ad- 
dresses, but  have  little  value  in  writing.  It  is  not  because  they 
are  idle  and  empty-headed  that  stump  orators  indulge  so  much 
in  stories.  In  reading  a  book  you  may  lay  it  aside  when 
tired  and  resume  it  again  at  leisure,  but  a  speech  must  be 
heard  through  at  a  sitting.  If  it  be  an  intellectual  pem- 
mican  of  fact  and  argument,  the  mind  soon  tires  in  the 
effort  to  take  in  and  digest  materials  so  solid  :  and  a  little  fun 
thrown  in  here  and  there  gives  a  needful  rest,  and  acts  like  a 
recess  for  a  school  of  children.  You  of  course  understand 
that  stories  and  figures  of  speech  are  embellishments  that 
serve  only  for  relief  or"  amusement,  and  that  no  amount  of 
them  can  prove  anything. 

VIII.  Some  things  are  to  be  avoided  with  conscientious 
care.  Among  them  are  all  slang  and  low,  coarse  or  unclean 
expressions,  all  puns,  playing  upon  the  sound  of  words,  and 
paltering  in  a  double  sense.  As  Artemus  Ward  said,  they 
are  not  funny ;  they  edify  no  one  and  please  no  one  who 
has  any  claim  to  be  pleased.  Avoid  also  all  those  phrases 
that  are  continually  starting  up  like  weeds  and  are  in  every- 
body's mouth,  enjoying  a  nine  days'  popularity.  Quotations 
of  apt  phrases  and  lines  of  poetry  should  be  admitted  spar- 
ingly. As  a  rule  employ  no  French  or  other  foreign  words. 
To  many  good  people  they  are  unintelligible  or  unpronounce- 
able ;  and  unless  your  knowledge  be  very  accurate  there  is 
a  chance  of  their  being  incorrect.  They  are  in  bad  taste  and 
wholly  out  of  tune ;  and  moreover  the  chances  are  a  thou- 
sand to  one  that  there  are  words  enough  in  English  to  tell 
more  than  you  know.  Do  not  clothe  little  thoughts  in  big 
words.  The  effect  is  less  disagreeable  when  the  words  seem 
unequal  to  the  weight  of  sense  they  have  to  bear.  Do  not 
"  inaugurate  "  a  new  style  of  shearing  your  "  phenomenal" 
poodle.  Moreover,  great  things  may  be  said  simply.  When 
very  young  I  read  these  words  in  a  book  that  was  then  old : 


566  English  Grammar. 

**  And  he  that  sat  upon  the  throne  said,  Behold  I  make  all 
things  new." 

A  fifth-grade  newspaper  would  now  express  it  thus  : 

And  the  occupant  of  the  celestial  divan  announced  his  deter- 
mination of  immediately  inaugurating  an  essentially  novel 
regime. 

Two  words,  "  inaugurate  "  and  "  regime,"  would  be  indis- 
pensable. If  the  Anglo-Saxon  reformers  sometimes  let 
their  zeal  carry  them  a  little  too  far,  what  a  debt  of  grati- 
tude is  due  them  for  raising  a  protest  against  such  verbiage  ! 

Another  thing  to  be  avoided  is  unnecessary  arithmetical 
figures.  In  the  present  age  there  is  a  craze  for  statistics, 
even  if  they  point  nowhere.  There  is  a  popular  saying  that 
figures  do  not  lie  ;  but  those  who  are  better  informed  are 
aware  that  they  are  mercenary  troops  that  fight  with  equal 
readiness  on  either  side  of  any  dispute.  The  possible  com- 
binations of  numbers  are  infinite,  and  some  of  them  may  be 
made  to  seem  to  favor  any  proposition  whatever.  Hence  a 
cautious  man  will  always  distrust  your  figures  except  the  few 
that  he  knows  already,  and  those  he  need  not  be  told.  You 
will  sometimes  see  a  public  man  stand  up  in  a  crowded  hall 
and  read  page  after  page  of  exports  and  imports  of  the  past 
twenty  years,  and  the  guessed  values  of  farms,  buildings,  and 
live  stock  in  44  States,  of  all  of  which  not  a  grain  sticks  in 
the  memory  of  any  one.  The  audience  sit  wearily  thinking 
of  something  else,  and  go  away  with  a  tired  feeling  of  hav- 
ing heard  of  something  vacant  and  vast.  The  figures  may 
or  may  not  be  misleading ;  they  are  certain  not  to  be 
remembered. 

In  writing  it  is  sometimes  necessary  to  introduce  numeri- 
cal statements ;  but  then  they  should  be  few  and  presented 
with  all  possible  clearness.  If  your  point  be  to  prove  the 
rapid  growth  of  Porkopolis,  it  will  be  suflScient  to  show  that 
the  number  of  pigs  killed  there  has  steadily  risen  in  ten  years 
from  53  to  53,ooo,cxx»;  you  can  then  afford  to  dispense  with 
the  statistics  of  beer  and  several  other  things. 


Suggestions  to  Young  Writers.  567 

Nouns  and  verbs  are  the  bones  and  muscles  of  language, 
that  give  it  form  and  strength.  Adjectives  should  be  em- 
ployed sparingly  and  with  discretion.  Adjectives  that  describe 
— sandy,  calcareous,  white,  liquid,  circular,  fibrous, — are  of 
course  to  be  used  wherever  necessary  ;  but  it  is  better  not  to 
be  profuse  with  those  that  are  intended  merely  to  depreciate 
or  to  raise  admiration.  They  give  an  inflated  appearance,  and 
are  a  great  source  of  weakness.  The  same  is  true  of  adverbs 
derived  from  adjectives.  So,  too,  pronouns  need  to  be  han- 
dled with  great  care.  They  are  a  lazy  makeshift  contrivance 
to  save  the  labor  of  naming  things.  The  greatest  source  of 
ambiguity  and  uncertainty  in  common  conversation  is  the 
continual  repetition  of  he,  she,  it,  they,  this,  that,  the  other, 
when  people  will  not  take  the  trouble  to  name  what  they  are 
talking  about.  The  following  is  a  sentence  from  a  sermon 
preached  by  Archbishop  Tillotson  before  the  king  and 
queen : 

"  Men  look  with  an  evil  eye  upon  the  good  that  is  in  others, 
and  think  that  their  reputation  obscures  them,  and  that  their 
commendable  qualities  do  stand  in  their  light ;  and  therefore  they 
do  what  they  can  to  cast  a  cloud  over  them,  that  the  bright  shin- 
ing of  their  virtues  may  not  scorch  them." 

Even  ill-sounding  words  and  combinations  are  objectiona- 
ble. They  can  be  detected  by  reading  aloud  carefully  and 
distinctly ;  and  the  faculty  of  detecting  faults  will  improve 
by  use.  Whatever  sounds  badly  is  not  well  written.  Some 
words  like  deprecatory,  peremptorily,  speculativeness,  are  ca- 
cophonous however  they  may  be  placed ;  but  a  much  com- 
moner fault  is  the  recurrence  of  similar  sounds  that  do  not 
well  go  together — because  the  laws  cause,  some  come  from 
home,  a  single  glass,  he  ran  on  in  an  tmintelligible  harangue. 
Roofless  is  well  enough,  but  shingleless  would  be  bad  ;  skill- 
less  and  tailless  are  not  much  better,  and  there  is  altogether 
too  much  sibillation  in  successlessness.  In  general  it  is  not 
desirable  to  have  the  same  word  occur  twice  in  a  sentence, 
or  end  two  successive  short  sentences.  It  is  even  worth 
while  to  take  some  little  pains  to  have  a  word  ending  with  a 


568  English  Grammar. 

vowel  followed  by  one  beginning  with  a  consonant,  and  to 
have  consonants  followed  by  vowels. 

IX.  The  naturalist  Buff  on  is  credited  with  saying  that 
the  style  is  the  man,  the  plain  English  of  which  seems  to  be 
that  every  one  has  a  way  of  expressing  his  thoughts  as  dis- 
tinctive of  the  individual  as  his  voice  or  features.  While 
it  should  be  the  constant  aim  to  correct  all  errors  and  remedy 
all  defects,  no  effort  should  be  made  to  form  a  style  by  imi- 
tation. The  habitual  and  appreciative  reading  of  good 
authors  will  influence  your  style  without  your  thinking  of  it. 
Having  a  stock  of  words  acquired  by  reading  and  having 
mastered  your  subject  as  a  whole  and  in  its  details,  tell  your 
story  in  your  own  words  and  in  your  own  way  without  any 
thought  about  style  or  fine  writing.  If  time  be  allowed  you, 
lay  aside  your  manuscript  until  you  have  in  a  manner  for- 
gotten it  and  can  see  it  with  something  like  the  eyes  of  a 
stranger.  Then  go  over  it  carefully,  strike  out  every  word 
that  can  be  spared,  change  every  word  and  every  sentence 
that  can  be  changed  for  the  better,  and  leave  the  rest  unal- 
tered. 


INDEX. 


Absolute  clauses,  523. 
Accent,  187. 

"       in  Arabic  and  Icelandic,  44. 
Acrostics  in  the  Bible,  112. 
Adjective  clauses,  515. 

"        pronouns,  333. 
Adjectives,  288,  513. 

"  comparison  of,  294. 

"  declension  of,  293. 

"  formation  of,  289. 

"  plural,  292. 

Adverbial  clauses,  520. 
Adverbs,  476. 
Agglutination,  8r. 

Alexandrian  Museum  and  Library,  47. 
Alphabet,  defects  of  our,  123. 

"         first  appearance  of,  T09. 

"         modifications    of,    in    Eng- 
land, 122. 

"         table  of,  129. 

"         the,  among  the  Greeksk  118. 

"  "in  Italy,  119. 

"         what  it  should  be,  123. 
Alphabetic  writing,  94. 
Alphabets  of  Lepsius  and  Ellis,  128, 

131-. 

Analysis  of  the  Dictionary,  36. 

Anglian  element  in  English,  14. 

Anomalies  of  pronunciation  and  spell- 
ing, 195. 

Anticipating  sounds  that  are  to  follow, 
163. 

Apposition,  515. 

Articles,  335. 

Articulate  sounds,  127. 

Aspirates,  159. 

Aspiration,  159,  170. 

Assimilation  of  foreign  materials,  34. 

Auxiliary  the  real  verb,  474,  521. 

Auxiliary  verbs,  372. 

Be,  413. 

Best  or  better  of  the  two,  304. 
Bilingual  inscriptions,  ic»6. 
Buddhist  missionaries,  98. 


Can,  400. 

Cases  of  nouns,  275. 
Celtic  element  in  English,  12. 
Cherokee  syllabary,  loi. 
Children  as  language-makers,  4. 
Chinese  writing,  96. 
Classification,  222. 
Cockneyism,  159. 
Codex  Argenteus,  g. 
Compounding  words,  56. 
Compound  tenses,  430. 
Condition  of  England  under  the  Nor- 
mans, 18. 
Conjugation,  415. 
Conjugations,  351. 
Corean  alphabet,  98. 
Cuneiform  writing,  103. 
Cyprus  patera,  the,  113. 

Dare,  407. 

Declension   in  Sanskrit  and  Hebrew, 

84. 
Demonstrative  pronouns,  333. 
Derivatives,  79. 
Devanagari,  100. 

Development  by  inflectional  endings, 
80. 
"  by  internal  changes,  86. 

Do,  405. 

Early  English  grammars,  48. 
Egyptian  hieroglyphics,  105. 
Ending  -eth  changed  to  -es,  420. 
English  and  American  usages,  193. 
Eshmunazar,  inscription  of,  116. 

Foreign  words  in  different  authors,  39. 
Forms  of  the  letters,  112. 
French  eagerly  learned,  19. 
French  element  in  English,  15. 

"      plurals,  251. 
Fundamental  sound  in  language,  127. 

Gender,  228. 
Gothic,  9. 


569 


570 


Index. 


Grammar,  a  descriptive  science,  50. 
' '        and  Lexicography  compared , 

43. 
"       beginnings  of,  46. 
"        divisions  of,  217, 
"        Max  Miiller's  idea  of,  44. 
"        not  indispensable,  46. 
"        What  does  it  teach  ?  43,  50. 
Greek  element  in  English,  30. 

"      plurals,  248. 
Grimm's  Law,  132. 

Have,  408. 

Hebrew  plurals,  251. 

"       square  letters,  117. 
Hieratic  writing,  108. 
Homonyms,  58. 
Hybrid  words,  79. 

Imperative  mood,  457. 
Inconsistency  of  our  spelling,  138. 
Indicative  mood,  442. 
Infinitive        "       463. 

"  "      with  to,  463,  465. 

Inflection,    extent   of,    in    other   lan- 
guages, 45. 
Instability  of  language,  3. 
Interrogative  pronoun,  327. 
Irish  pronunciation,  155. 
"Is  being,"  473. 
Italian  plurals,  252. 
Italics,  121. 

Japan,  introduction  of  writing  into,  99. 

Language,  changes  of,  4. 
"  families  of,  9. 

"  of  animals,  52. 

"  what  it  must   be    capable 

of,  221. 
Latin,  books  written  in,  16,  20. 

"      plurals,  245. 
Law  Latin,  17. 
Layamon,  20. 

Laziness  a  factor  in  word-making,  56. 
Legal  French,  17. 
"     maxims,  17. 
Let,  402. 
Letters,  intruded,  149. 

"       small,  invention  of,  121. 
"       that    preserve    their    sounds, 
146. 
Like,  used  as  a  preposition,  488. 
Loss  of  inflections,  24. 

May,  373. 

Mexican  picture  writing,  96. 

Moabite  stone,  the,  113. 

Moods,  440. 

Musi,  401. 


Names  of  the  letters,  109. 

"        "    "  "       in  Italy,  120. 

Negative,  double,  530. 

the,  483. 
Nimroud  weights,  116. 
Norman  Conquest,  15. 
Nouns,  225. 

"      factitious,  265. 

"      of  aggregation,  541. 

"      that  mimic  humanity,  264. 

"         "         "     plurality,  264. 
Number,  235. 
Numerals,  337. 

Obelisk  of  Philse,  107. 
Object,  510. 

"       indirect,  519. 
Order  of  the  letters,  112. 

"      of  words,  511,  524. 
Organs  of  speech,  125. 
Ormulum,  the,  20. 
Ought,  404. 

Palatalization,  152. 
Participle,  past,  468,  471. 

"  present,  468. 

Participles,  468. 
Parts  of  speech,  224. 
Passive  voice,  472. 
Person  and  number  of  verbs,  416. 
Persons  of  nouns,  287. 
Phonetic  pictures,  95. 
"         spelling,  205. 
Picture  writing,  94. 
Plural  of  compound  nouns,  254. 
Plurals,  irregular,  239. 

' '       of  foreign  words,  244. 
"       peculiar,  265. 
Possessive  pronouns,  336. 
Predicate,  510. 
Prefixes,  59. 
Prepositions,  485. 
Pronoun  of  the  first  person,  309. 
"         "    "   second  person,  313. 
"         "    "    third  person,  316. 
Pronouns,  307. 

"         classes  of,  308. 
"         personal,  308. 
"         syntax  of,  439. 
Pronunciation,    and     spelling,     when 
they  agree,  138. 
"  often  unsettled,  139, 

"  precedes  spelling,  138. 

Protasis  and  apodosis,  395. 

Rebus  a  step  towards  writing,  95. 
Reduplication,  350, 
Reflexive  pronoun,  323,  539. 
Relative  pronouns,  328. 


Index. 


D/ 


Rhotacism,  243. 
Roots,  55. 

Rosetta  Stone,  the,  106. 
Runic  alphabet,  112. 

Saxon  element  in  English,  12. 
Scandinavian  element  in  English,  14. 

.  ^eif,  539- 
Sentence,  the,  509. 
Sentences,  affirmative,  509-529. 
"  different  kinds  of,  509. 

"  imperative,  536. 

"  interrogative,  535. 

"  negative,  529. 

Shemitic  alphabet,  109. 
Shortening  of  words,  142. 
Silent  letters,  146. 
Silver  Book,  the,  g. 
Sounds  in  Anglo-Saxon,  140. 
Sounds,  scale  of,  represented,  144. 
Sources  of  English,  12. 
Spelling  formerly  unsettled,  143. 
"        phonetic,  205. 
"        principles  of,  178. 
"        proposed  reforms  in,  212. 
Strong  verbs,  351. 
Subject,  510,  513. 

"        grammatical,  517. 
"        logical,  517. 
Subjunctive  mood,  444. 
Suffixes,  70. 


Symbolism,  95. 
Syntax,  506. 

Tenses,  422. 
Termination  -ed,  366. 

Ulphilas,  his  translations  of  Scripture, 

9- 
Uncial  letters,  121. 
Unstable  letters,  148. 

Verbal  nouns,  463. 
Verbs,  343. 

"       impersonal,  348. 

"       intransitive,  346. 

"       reflexive,  347. 

"       syntax  of,  520,  547. 

"       transitive,  346. 
Vowels,  130. 
Vowel  shifting,  154. 
Vowels,  influence  of  one  upon  another, 

83. 
Vowel  sounds  grow  thinner,  154. 

Weights,  set  of,  from  Nimroud,  116. 
Will  2,x\A  shall,  IT] . 
Words  at  first  monosyllabic,  54. 

"      borrowed,  of  what  kind,  24,  27. 
invention  of,  53. 
primitive  end  in  vowels,  54. 
"      that  are  mistakes,  91. 
Worth,  as  a  preposition,  538. 


THE    END. 


l^    I 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A    000  690  241     5 


